Although Professors Sean Tu and Aaron Kesselheim have advocated for legislation to respond to the Federal Circuit’s 2021 opinion in GSK v. Teva, that case did not—as they assert—“threaten[] to nullify every skinny label carveout.” Rather, the Federal Circuit applied the unremarkable principle that generic drug manufacturers are obligated to ensure that their labeling and other representations do not induce infringement of an innovator’s method-of-use patents. Consistent with this longstanding principle, generic drug manufacturers continue to pursue skinny labeling strategies. In fact, several recent court decisions have distinguished GSK and found lack of inducement by a generic applicant’s proposed labeling, showing that skinny labeling strategies have not been “nullified.”
Recent Posts
- Other Barks and Bites for Friday, June 27: EGC Says ‘NERO CHAMPAGNE’ Unduly Exploits Protected Designation of Origin; SCOTUS Seeks SG Views on Skinny Label Issues in Hikma; and a Big Week for Copyrights and AI
- PTAB Designates Informative Director Review Decision Vacating Institution of Two Petitions Challenging Same Claims
- Stewart Grants Discretionary Denial Due to Patent Being Dismissed From Litigation
- U.S. Government’s Intervention in Patent Case Signals Good News for Patent Owners Seeking Injunctions
- Gaming Patent Litigation on Both Sides of the ‘v’ | IPWatchdog Unleashed