Biogen Settlement Summary
Sheppard Mullin | FDA Law Blog » Biotechnology
by Eve Costopoulos and Dominick DiSabatino
1y ago
On Monday September 26, the Department of Justice announced a settlement resolving a lawsuit filed by former employee Michael Bawduniak (the “Plaintiff”) against Biogen Inc. (the “Company”) under the qui tam provisions of the federal False Claims Act.[1] The Plaintiff’s lawsuit[2] alleged that the Company paid kickbacks to healthcare providers (HCPs) to induce them to prescribe the Company’s multiple sclerosis (MS) drugs from Jan. 1, 2009, through March 18, 2014. These drugs included Avonex (interferon beta-1a), which had been on the market for at least a decade, and Tysabri (natalizumab ..read more
Visit website
FDA Proposes Risk-Based and Remote Inspection Strategies in New Report
Sheppard Mullin | FDA Law Blog » Biotechnology
by Allison Fulton and Eva Schifini
1y ago
On May 5, 2021, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a much-anticipated report, “Resiliency Roadmap for FDA Inspectional Oversight,” which provides a roadmap for the agency’s post-pandemic plans to return to a consistent state of inspection operations.  For the near term, FDA reports that it will continue to prioritize critical inspections of both domestic and foreign facilities, including preapproval inspections for priority products and inspections in reaction to recalls or other safety issues.  For the long term, the agency likely will employ the remote monitoring st ..read more
Visit website
Breaking Down FDA’s New Remote Monitoring Strategy
Sheppard Mullin | FDA Law Blog » Biotechnology
by Allison Fulton and Eva Schifini
1y ago
On Wednesday, April 14, 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a long-awaited final guidance document explaining its policy for conducting remote “evaluations” during COVID-19.  According to the guidance, FDA will request and conduct voluntary remote evaluations at (1) facilities where drugs and biologics are manufactured, processed, packed, or held; (2) facilities covered under the bioresearch monitoring (BIMO) program; and (3) outsourcing facilities registered under section 503B of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA).  The evaluations do not replace i ..read more
Visit website
Federal Circuit Revolutionizes Country of Origin Analysis for Pharmaceuticals
Sheppard Mullin | FDA Law Blog » Biotechnology
by Curtis Dombek
1y ago
The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has just rejected the longstanding U.S. government position that the country of origin of pharmaceuticals in the context of U.S. government procurement is determined by where the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) is made.  Acetris Health, LLC v. United States, 2018-2399, judgment of February 10, 2020.  In the Acetris case the API was made in India.  It was then shipped in bulk to the United States, where it was manufactured into tablets.  The central question in the case was whether the resulting tablets were a ..read more
Visit website
FDA Year in Review: A Shifting Regulatory Landscape
Sheppard Mullin | FDA Law Blog » Biotechnology
by Allison Fulton
1y ago
The FDA actions that dominated 2019 demonstrated a shifting regulatory landscape for certain product types, such as e-cigarettes, foods and supplements containing cannabidiol (CBD), and digital health / machine learning enabled medical devices. FDA continued to take action to lower drug prices by focusing on approvals of competitive biosimilars and generic drugs, and FDA enforcement actions signaled the Agency’s ongoing interest in ensuring GMP compliance overseas. 1. Tobacco: E-Cigarettes Top Public Health, Enforcement Priority E-cigarettes dominated the headlines throughout 2019. On December ..read more
Visit website
Extending the Patentable Life of 3D Printers: A Lesson From the Pharmaceutical Industry
Sheppard Mullin | FDA Law Blog » Biotechnology
by Jesse Salen
1y ago
Modern innovation typically occurs one step-improvement at a time. Some clients initially question whether their new application of an existing technology is patentable. Usually, the answer is ‘yes.’ Under U.S. law (and most other jurisdictions), an innovation to an existing technology is patentable so long as at least one claim limitation is novel and non-obvious. See 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103. Thus, innovative step-improvements to, and new applications of, existing technology may be patentable. Moreover, these step-improvements may prove lucrative, particularly when the underlying technology ..read more
Visit website

Follow Sheppard Mullin | FDA Law Blog » Biotechnology on FeedSpot

Continue with Google
Continue with Apple
OR