Biosimilar Case Appeal Likely Off Until October

Share

By asking for the view of the Solicitor General on an appeal filed by both parties in the Amgen v. Sandoz biosimilar case, the Supreme Court has effectively delayed any decision on the appeal until at least October, once its new session opens. Three Fish & Richardson attorneys who have been tracking the case write in an online blog post that the high court invites the Solicitor General to outline the government’s view on an issue about 11 times a year. It takes the Solicitor General, on average, between four and five months to respond to the request, they say.

The case arose after Sandoz filed an aBLA for Zarxio, a biosimilar of Amgen’s Neupogen filgrastim product. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals held that (1) the “patent dance” provisions of the Biologic Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) are not mandatory for some applicants; and (2) a biosimilar applicant may not give effective notice of intent to commercially market until after FDA has licensed the applicant’s biosimilar product.

Sandoz’ appeal to the high court asks for a review of the second part of the decision, arguing that the Federal Circuit “has disrupted the careful balance struck by Congress between competition and innovation” by “delaying access by patients to biosimilars for six months longer than Congress intended.” Amgen filed an opposition to Sandoz’ request for the high court to hear the case and also filed a conditional cross-appeal saying that if the court does decide to hear the case, it should also review the “patent dance” aspect.

The attorneys write that for now the Federal Circuit’s holdings remain binding. “For co-pending late-stage BPCIA litigation,” they say, “this means that the courts will be forced to build upon an uncertain foundation.” They note that if the Federal Circuit rules in a pending Amgen v. Apotex case involving a Neulasta biosimilar that notice of commercial marketing is only effective after FDA approval for subsection (k) applicants who choose to engage in the “patent dance,” based on its ruling in Amgen v. Sandoz, only to have that decision overturned by the Supreme Court, there are likely to be requests for the high court to hear the Apotex case as well.

Read more