The FDA and Patent Office React to Biden's Call to Action on Drug Patents
The president directed the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) to propose ways the two agencies could collaborate towards this end. The agencies responded with a joint proposal to change how patents protecting drugs are examined, prompting responses from a wide range of industry participants.
March 27, 2023 at 09:45 AM
8 minute read
Special Sections
![The White House, Washington, D.C. - Image](http://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/389/2019/12/The-White-House-Article-201912182022.jpg)
In July 2021, President Joe Biden issued an Executive Order that took aim at increasing competition in the pharmaceutical industry. The President directed the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) to propose ways the two agencies could collaborate towards this end. The agencies responded with a joint proposal to change how patents protecting drugs are examined, prompting responses from a wide range of industry participants. This article reviews the proposed initiatives and the industry response, and outlines what to expect next.
Current Practice and Agency Roles
Pharmaceutical innovator companies that research, develop, and bring new drugs to market work with both the FDA and the PTO. Innovators must seek FDA approval before they can market a drug, and they typically go to the PTO to seek patent protection for the drug as well. When the FDA is asked to approve a proposed drug, it focuses on the safety and efficacy of the product. The details of the regulatory process will differ somewhat depending on whether the product is a so-called "small molecule" drug that is chemically manufactured, or a "biologic" that is made using a biological system, but the fundamental purpose of FDA review is the same. The PTO's review of patent applications has a different purpose: its basic goal is to determine whether patent applicants have made novel inventions meeting the statutory requirements for patent protection. To make that call, patent examiners with technical backgrounds review each application against what was already known in the field, or "prior art." And applicants in this process have a duty to provide examiners with material information to aid their examination. These processes happen on separate tracks: a drug patent can issue before the drug it covers is FDA-approved. Given the time it takes to complete them, patents covering a drug—which, like all patents, typically expire 20 years after an application is first filed—may have lost years of statutory patent protection before the drug can even be marketed.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All![Antitrust Law Continues Its Turn in the Spotlight Antitrust Law Continues Its Turn in the Spotlight](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/99/84/f682ab6f439eb2da45011b672ec4/robin-van-der-meulen-767x633.jpg)
![The Value of ComFed for New Lawyers (And Not So New Ones) The Value of ComFed for New Lawyers (And Not So New Ones)](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/5f/85/1a79f1e94c178cc94d593a1b9b02/michael-cardello-767x633.jpg)
![Criminal Justice Discovery Reform: More Reforming than Meets the Eye Criminal Justice Discovery Reform: More Reforming than Meets the Eye](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/6d/67/918e3c944e0c80e2c926cb47eef2/leah-nowotarski-767x633.jpg)
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Wilmer, White & Case, Crowell Among the Latest to Add DC Lateral Partners
- 2Advance Auto Parts Hires GC Who Climbed From Bottom to Top of Lowe's Legal Department
- 3Judge Rules Georgia Railroad Can Seize Land as Landowners Vow to Fight
- 4On the Move and After Hours: Einhorn Barbarito; Gibbons; Greenbaum Rowe; Pro Bono Partnership
- 5On The Move: Squire Patton Boggs, Akerman Among Four Firms Adding Atlanta Partners
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250