scholarly journals Research Use Exemptions to Patent Infringement for Drug Discovery and Development in the United States

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. a020933-a020933 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. A. Russo ◽  
J. Johnson
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas F. Cotter ◽  
John M. Golden ◽  
Oskar Liivak ◽  
Brian J. Love ◽  
Norman Siebrasse ◽  
...  

This chapter:(1) describes the current state of, and normative basis for, the law of reasonable royalties among the leading jurisdictions for patent infringement litigation, as well as the principal arguments for and against various practices relating to the calculation of reasonable royalties; and(2) for each of the major issues discussed, provides one or more recommendations.The chapter’s principal recommendation is that, when applying a “bottom-up” approach to estimating reasonable royalties, courts should replace the Georgia-Pacific factors (and analogous factors used outside the United States) with a smaller list of considerations, specifically:(1) calculating the incremental value of the invention and dividing it appropriately between the parties;(2) assessing market evidence, such as comparable licenses; and (3) where feasible and cost-justified, using each of these first two considerations as a “check” on the accuracy of the other.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory Sidak

In the United States, a patent holder can pursue several remedies against a patent infringer. Section 284 of the Patent Act provides that, upon a finding of infringement, “the court shall award the claimant damages adequate to compensate for the infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty . . . .” In addition, § 283 provides that a court “may grant injunctions in accordance with the principles of equity to prevent the violation of any right secured by patent.” Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 also allows a patent holder to petition the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC)—a federal agency that investigates matters of international trade and advises on international trade policy— to issue an exclusion order against an infringer, a remedy that denies the importation and sale in the United States of products that infringe a valid and enforceable U.S. patent.3 In a case of patent infringement, a patent holder may thus seek damages for the infringement, an injunction, and an exclusion order.


2011 ◽  
Vol 95 (5) ◽  
pp. 1672-1676 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harsha Sharma ◽  
Erica B. Johnstone ◽  
Elena Gates ◽  
Sae H. Sohn ◽  
Heather G. Huddleston ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 424-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gail H. Javitt

Access to human biospecimens is widely regarded as essential to the progress of medical research, and in particular, to the success of “personalized medicine.” Understanding the influence of genetic variation on human health and disease requires that researchers conduct genetic and other studies on thousands of human specimens. Over the past decade, human “biobanks” — vast collections of human biospecimens — have proliferated both in the United States and internationally. These biobanks are subject to a heterogeneous mix of standards that govern the collection and use of biospecimens.


Author(s):  
Gordon M. Cragg ◽  
Michael R. Boyd ◽  
John H. Cardellina ◽  
Michael R. Grever ◽  
Saul A. Schepartz ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
D Samba Reddy

Thirty (30) new drugs have been approved by the FDA in 2011 for marketing in the United States. This list includes novel new drugs, known as new molecular entities (NMEs), biologics and new indications for drugs already approved. Eleven of the 30 NMEs were new drugs approved for orphan diseases, while twelve are considered first-in-class drugs with a unique new mechanism of action. During 2011, the FDA approved many unique and new drugs for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, deep vein thrombosis, systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), and epilepsy. In addition,  several new biologicals were approved in the past year for the treatment of macular degeneration, acute lymphoblastic leukemia, Hodgkin lymphoma, melanoma, chronic hepatitis C, and SLE. The introduction of 30 NMEs in 2011 underscores a robust success rate. It confirms that innovation is once again beginning to pay off. Analysis of drug approvals reveals a unique new trend in drug discovery in the face of stiff competition from generic products and declining revenues. In the existing climate of reduced pipeline for NMEs, the future and survival of big companies rests heavily on their unique niche products and biologics with relatively less competition from generic manufacturers. However, the competition for biosimilars is growing by the hour and therefore, crafting innovative generic biologicals is vital for generic biotech companies. Although the number of NMEs approved in the past 10 years has been declining, there is a substantial increase in R&D expenditure for drug discovery. Overall, the new drug approval list unveils unique and emerging trends in drug discovery especially in the current generics era. 


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document