Skip to main content

IP and Health Care Economics

Image result for watson generic drug manufacturer

A federal appeals court recently ruled that a patent on a successful birth control product is invalid  because the patent owner made an offer to sell the invention more than one year before it applied for said patent.  This sounds like a straightforward application of what patent lawyers call the "on sale bar." MERCK & Cie v. WATSON LABS, 125 F.Supp 3d 503 (D. Del. 2015).

Merck is appealing this to the SCOTUS. It sought a "stay of mandate," that is, it tried to get Chief Justice Roberts to rule that the decision would not take effect until the high court heard and decided the matter. But they failed to get the stay, so Watson, the generic drug manufacturer, gets to sell the drug at issue in the US pending further developments.

Here's a relevant brief from Watson's lawyers.

On July 27, Roberts denied that application for stay in a brief order, providing no rationale.

Merck's argument is that what it did more than one year prior to the application was not
the sort of public offer of sale that is supposed to trigger the one-year clock on a filing, and that the Federal Circuit Court has now overturned decades of precedents by treating private negotiations as a public sale.

Here's a more complete discussion:  http://lyldenlawnews.com/2016/07/27/move-block-generic-drug-sales-fails/

I have no profound point to draw from all this. But the law of IP and the economics of health care are both subjects of abiding fascination for me, so their intersection is likewise.

Comments

  1. What is the rationale for the on-sale bar? (Wikipedia, which uses the hyphen, doesn't say in its "On-sale bar" entry. It discusses what constitutes a sale and when the one-year period starts.)

    ReplyDelete
  2. The law incorporates an intuitive sense that before an inventor starts to sell something at all, THAT is the time to make the decision -- "shall I be putting this into the public domain, or will I seek to keep proprietary control of it?" Acting as if something is available to the public, but then, after a year, seeking to assert proprietary rights, seems capricious and likely to make life unnecessarily complicated for other parties developing related technologies. Predictability, certainty, repose, all the words of that order may be applied here.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Great Chain of Being

One of the points that Lovejoy makes in the book of that title I mentioned last week is the importance, in the Neo-Platonist conceptions and in the later development of the "chain of being" metaphor, of what he calls the principle of plenitude. This is the underlying notion that everything that can exist must exist, that creation would not be possible at all were it to leave gaps.

The value of this idea for a certain type of theodicy is clear enough.

This caused theological difficulties when these ideas were absorbed into Christianity.  I'll quote a bit of what Lovejoy has to say about those difficulties:

"For that conception, when taken over into Christianity, had to be accommodated to very different principles, drawn from other sources, which forbade its literal interpretation; to carry it through to what seemed to be its necessary implications was to be sure of falling into one theological pitfall or another."

The big pitfalls were: determinism on the on…

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.



We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majestic wate…