Brinckerhoff Discusses Recent Federal Circuit Decision on Biosimilar with Bloomberg Law
December 15, 2017
Bloomberg Law Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal – Daily Edition
Partner Courtenay Brinckerhoff was quoted in a Bloomberg Law Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal – Daily Edition article, “Biosimilars Statute Trumps State Law, Appeals Court Rules,” about a recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruling on the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act.
The court, in a December 14, 2017, ruling, held that the statute, which provides a relatively quick path for biosimilar makers to get new drug products to market, supersedes state law claims. The ruling was the second big win for biosimilar applicants this year. Earlier the U.S. Supreme Court allowed a biosimilar applicant to skip a notice period to a biologic owner before marketing its biosimilar product.
“The decision favors biosimilar applicants in that it forecloses a state law remedy for failing to comply with the BPCIA information exchange procedures, and thereby confirms that doing so is completely optional,” Brinckerhoff said. “Since the field of biosimilar litigation is relatively new, the decision does not upset any long-settled practices, although existing cases may include similar state law claims that may not survive this decision.”
The court, in a December 14, 2017, ruling, held that the statute, which provides a relatively quick path for biosimilar makers to get new drug products to market, supersedes state law claims. The ruling was the second big win for biosimilar applicants this year. Earlier the U.S. Supreme Court allowed a biosimilar applicant to skip a notice period to a biologic owner before marketing its biosimilar product.
“The decision favors biosimilar applicants in that it forecloses a state law remedy for failing to comply with the BPCIA information exchange procedures, and thereby confirms that doing so is completely optional,” Brinckerhoff said. “Since the field of biosimilar litigation is relatively new, the decision does not upset any long-settled practices, although existing cases may include similar state law claims that may not survive this decision.”
People
Related News
December 18, 2025
In the News
Kyle Faget Weighs in on HHS Proposed Rule Limiting Gender-Affirming Care
Foley & Lardner LLP partner Kyle Faget commented on a recent proposal from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in the Law360 article, “HHS Proposes Hospital Ban On Gender Care For Minors.”
December 12, 2025
In the News
Foley Chairman and CEO Daljit Doogal Talks Firm Strategy and Growth, Featured in Media for Reelection
Foley & Lardner LLP Chairman and CEO Daljit Doogal is featured in The American Lawyer article, “Foley Board Taps Daljit Doogal for Second Term as Chair and CEO,” for his reelection to a second four-year term.
December 11, 2025
In the News
Carrie Hoffman Comments on SCOTUS Arbitration Jurisdiction Case
Foley & Lardner LLP partner Carrie Hoffman commented on the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to hear an arbitration jurisdiction case in the Law360 article, "High Court Arb. Jurisdiction Case May Impact W&H Cases."