Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

The Intellectual Property StrategistKickerFeaturesTopicsCommercial LawRegulationSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

Evolution of the Patent Infringement Safe Harbor

By Sarah A. Bennington and Anthony M. Insogna
September 02, 2014

Since its enactment in 1984, the scope of the “safe harbor” provision of the patent code, codified at 35 U.S.C. '271(e)(1), has been in flux. The provision is intended to exempt from infringement certain acts related to the development of drugs and medical devices that are subject to FDA regulatory approval, to enable competitors to immediately enter the market upon patent expiration. However, the contours and boundaries of the safe harbor have been a consistent source of controversy in the courts.

Although some argue that the provision was intended to provide a narrow exception to patent infringement to facilitate the development of generic drugs, many court decisions have expanded the scope of the safe harbor over time. Other appellate cases have attempted, with some success, to set limits. A recent Southern District of California decision in Isis Pharms., Inc. v. Santaris Pharma A/S Corp., No. 3:11-cv-2214-GPC-KSC, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26148, (S.D. Cal. Feb. 27, 2014), reconsideration denied , 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72755, suggests a renewed desire to reign in the scope of the safe harbor and set a minimum threshold for exemption.

This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

Compliance Officers: Recent Regulatory Guidance and Enforcement Actions and Mitigating the Risk of Personal Liability Image

This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.