Navigation

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
start [2026/05/20 20:25] – [Categories] lenstart [2026/06/08 05:33] (current) len
Line 1: Line 1:
 ~~NOTOC~~ ~~NOTOC~~
 ====== Patent News ====== ====== Patent News ======
 +
 +
 +===== Supreme Court Narrows Inducement: Affirmative steps required (posted 06/08/26) =====
 +
 +In //{{ :legal:infringement:inducement:hickma_24-889_s.ct.pdf |Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Amarin Pharama, Inc.}}//, the Supreme Court sharply limited when a generic drug manufacturer can be accused of inducing infringement after using a “skinny label” to carve out a patented method of use. The Court rejected the Federal Circuit’s more permissive approach, holding that it is not enough that doctors could read a generic manufacturer’s label, website, or press releases as encouraging a patented use. Instead, the patent owner must plausibly allege affirmative, active steps by the generic manufacturer to encourage infringement.
 +
 +For Hatch-Waxman practice, the decision gives generic manufacturers more breathing room when marketing an FDA-approved generic for non-patented uses, especially where their statements reflect legal compliance, FDA-required labeling sameness, ordinary “generic equivalent” language, or standard industry practice. At the same time, the Court did not say skinny-label inducement claims are impossible; it emphasized that inducement can be express or implicit, but it must be clear, affirmative, and directed toward encouraging the patented use. The practical effect is to make induced-infringement claims harder to plead at the motion-to-dismiss stage when they rest on omissions, vague marketing language, AB-rating references, or speculation about how physicians might interpret a generic’s communications. 
 +
 +  * [[lex>library/detail.aspx?g=963b8f94-609a-448d-90f5-08ad6ce71b32|Background and summary]]
 +  * See also: //Cox Communications v. Sony Music Entertainment//, 146 S. Ct. 959 (2026)
  
 ===== USPTO Guidance on subject matter eligibility declarations (SMEDs) (posted 02/09/26) ===== ===== USPTO Guidance on subject matter eligibility declarations (SMEDs) (posted 02/09/26) =====

User Tools