<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://rss.justia.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><rss xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>FDA Lawyers Blog</title>
        <link>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/</link>
        <description>Published By Frommer Lawrence &amp; Haug</description>
        <language>en</language>
        <copyright>Copyright 2013</copyright>
        <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2013 07:00:00 -0500</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/</generator>
        <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>

        <atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://rss.justia.com/FdaLawyersBlogCom" /><feedburner:info uri="fdalawyersblogcom" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><feedburner:emailServiceId>FdaLawyersBlogCom</feedburner:emailServiceId><feedburner:feedburnerHostname>http://feedburner.google.com</feedburner:feedburnerHostname><item>
            <title>Plan B Battle Continues Despite FDA's Decision to Lower Age Restriction</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/plan%20b.png"&gt;&lt;img alt="plan b.png" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/05/plan b-thumb-300x224-64742.png" width="300" height="224" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;The fight over whether versions of the emergency contraceptives Plan B and Plan B One-Step (collectively "Plan B") should be available without a prescription to all women continued yesterday.  Lawyers for FDA appeared before Judge Edward Korman of the Eastern District of New York urging him to stay his &lt;a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=tummino+v.+hamburg&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,33&amp;case=14819633686957943260&amp;scilh=0"&gt;April 4 Order&lt;/a&gt; requiring the Agency to lift age restrictions on access to emergency contraceptives by May 10.  FDA has appealed that ruling to the Second Circuit.  The Agency has yet to implement the court's directive, but in late April it &lt;a href="http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm350230.htm"&gt;approved&lt;/a&gt; a supplemental new drug application ("sNDA") that lowers the age at which women can obtain these drugs without a prescription from 17 to 15.  Judge Korman expressed skepticism as to the timing of the approval and criticized the Agency for not following his order.  A ruling on the stay is expected by the end of this week.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;FDA's actions have received mixed reviews.  Last week, President Barack Obama reiterated his support of FDA's and the Department of Health and Human Services' ("DHHS's") determination that the age-restriction should be fifteen.  He said that he was "very comfortable with the decisions they've made."  Others have been more critical.  Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the &lt;a href="http://reproductiverights.org/"&gt;Center for Reproductive Rights&lt;/a&gt;, speaking after the Department of Justice's appeal to the Second Circuit &lt;a href="http://reproductiverights.org/en/press-room/obama-administration-appeals-federal-court-order-to-make-emergency-contraception-availabl"&gt;said&lt;/a&gt;, "We are deeply disappointed that just days after President Obama proclaimed his commitment to women's reproductive rights, his administration has decided once again to deprive women of their right to obtain emergency contraception without unjustified and burdensome restrictions."&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/scotpittman.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href="http://www.flhlaw.com/pittman"&gt;Scot B. Pittman&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=scot+pittman&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;  

&lt;p&gt;The approval of Plan B has a long history.  Originally approved in 1999 for prescription-only use, Plan B became the United States' first emergency contraceptive.  In February 2001, sixty-six organizations filed a &lt;a href="http://reproductiverights.org/sites/crr.civicactions.net/files/documents/Citizen's%20Petition%20-%20Full%20Original.PDF"&gt;Citizen Petition&lt;/a&gt; with FDA urging the Agency to switch Plan B, as well as any other emergency contraceptives, from a prescription-only drug to an over-the-counter ("OTC") drug and remove all age and point-of-sale restrictions.  Despite repeated claims that it would address the outstanding petition, the Agency waited over five years to rule--denying the Petition in June 2006.  FDA claimed that the petitioners had failed to provide sufficient data or information to meet the statutory and regulatory requirements of an OTC switch to any age group.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/05/plan-b-battle-continues-despit.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=bL8weN-IG3A:ci2Jttj-Gx4:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=bL8weN-IG3A:ci2Jttj-Gx4:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=bL8weN-IG3A:ci2Jttj-Gx4:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=bL8weN-IG3A:ci2Jttj-Gx4:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=bL8weN-IG3A:ci2Jttj-Gx4:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/bL8weN-IG3A" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/bL8weN-IG3A/plan-b-battle-continues-despit.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/05/plan-b-battle-continues-despit.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Citizen Petitions</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Human Drugs</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Litigation</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 15:41:03 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/05/plan-b-battle-continues-despit.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>First Inter Partes Review Petition for Design Patent Granted by USPTO</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/sippycup.png"&gt;&lt;img alt="sippycup.png" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/05/sippycup-thumb-300x363-64404.png" width="300" height="363" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;Last week, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") instituted its first &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/Luv%20n%20care%20v%20%20Toys%20R%20Us%20%20decision%20to%20institute%20inter%20partes%20review%20%2801268112%29.pdf"&gt;inter partes review&lt;/a&gt; of a design patent, U.S. Patent No. &lt;a href="http://www.google.com/patents/USD617465?pg=PA2&amp;dq=D617,465&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=FmqCUcahC7i14AOSv4GoCA&amp;ved=0CDUQ6AEwAA"&gt;D617,465&lt;/a&gt; ("the '465 Patent") assigned to Luv N' Care, Ltd.  Petitioners, Munchkin, Inc. and Toys "R" Us, Inc., successfully persuaded the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that "there is a reasonable likelihood that Petitioners would prevail with respect to the sole claim of the '465 Patent."  &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The claim of the '465 Patent recites "the ornamental design for a drinking cup, as shown and described."  The '465 Patent includes five figures of a drinking cup having a vessel, collar, and spout.  The Petitioners alleged that the claim of the '465 Patent was obvious over U.S. Published Patent Application No. &lt;a href="http://www.google.com/patents/US20070221604?pg=PA11&amp;dq=2007/0221604&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=b2qCUYHLJ7il4AOWo4HIBg&amp;ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA"&gt;2007/0221604&lt;/a&gt; published September 27, 2007 ("Hakim '604") and, separately, obvious over U.S. Patent No. &lt;a href="http://www.google.com/patents/US6994225?dq=6,994,225&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ei=sWqCUYurL5Wj4AOSzYDoCQ&amp;ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA"&gt;6,994,225&lt;/a&gt; issued February 7, 2006 ("Hakim '225").  The Petitioners also presented numerous combinations of references to assert that the claim of the '465 Patent was obvious.  These additional obviousness arguments were grouped into nine categories according to the primary reference being asserted.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt; &lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/shellyfujikawa.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt; &lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/shelly-m-fujikawa.html"&gt;Shelly Fujikawa. Ph.D&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=shelly+fujikawa&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;As an initial matter, the Board addressed the effective filing date of the claim of the '465 Patent since several asserted references were intervening prior art, in particular Hakim '604 and Hakim '225.  The '465 Patent issued from U.S. Application Serial No. 29/292,909, which was filed on October 31, 2007, as a continuation of U.S. Application Serial No. 10/536,106 ("the '106 Application"), which is the national stage of PCT Patent Application PCT/US03/24400 filed August 5, 2003.  The Board concluded that the claims were not entitled to the benefit of the filing date of the '106 Application, because the '106 Application did not have sufficient disclosure to demonstrate that the inventor possessed the claimed subject matter at the time of filing the '106 Application.  In particular, the drawings of the '106 Application do not show the same design as the drawing of the '465 Patent.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/05/first-inter-partes-review-peti.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=dK3z-f498lU:OoWdSSyEAH4:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=dK3z-f498lU:OoWdSSyEAH4:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=dK3z-f498lU:OoWdSSyEAH4:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=dK3z-f498lU:OoWdSSyEAH4:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=dK3z-f498lU:OoWdSSyEAH4:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/dK3z-f498lU" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/dK3z-f498lU/first-inter-partes-review-peti.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/05/first-inter-partes-review-peti.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Litigation</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Patents</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 09:23:46 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/05/first-inter-partes-review-peti.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>The Venture Café Hosts Life Sciences Week - FLH Partner Brian J. Malkin Holds Office Hours 3-5pm</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/02/venturecafe-thumb-300x224-57785.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="Thumbnail image for venturecafe.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/02/venturecafe-thumb-300x224-57785-thumb-300x224-57786.jpg" width="300" height="224" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;This week &lt;a href="http://www.vencaf.org/"&gt;The Venture Café&lt;/a&gt; in Cambridge, Massachusetts hosts Life Sciences Week with a special focus on life science research in the Greater Boston area.  Featured life science research speakers include Akrivis (ADAPT™ technology, which allows cancer detection much earlier by increasing the sensitivity of early biomarker detection and enabling the medical imaging of millimeter-sized cancer tumors), Human Metabolome Technologies (metabolome profiling for tumor metabolism, biomarker discovery and production optimization), Advirna (powerful and innovative tools to regulate activity of genes inside living cells), Heartbt Foundation (newly-developing non-profit seeking to boost translational research by bridging medical, professionals, big pharma, researchers, NGOs, the general public, and others), Extend Biosciences (startup biotech company with a platform technology that enables the development of long-acting peptide based drugs), Anchor Therapeutics (pre-clinical stage drug discovery company advancing Pepducin Technology, a novel approach towards allosteric modulators of G-protein coupled receptors), Lab Central (soon-to-open facility to house up to 65 scientists, in 20 individual lab stations and 9 private lab suites in the heart of Kendall Square), and Cellanyx (biomarker-based diagnostic biopsy test to determine oncogenic and metastatic potential for prostate tumors).  The Venture Café will also host a Roundtable of Life Sciences Entrepreneurship in Massachusetts, featuring Peter Abair of the Massachusetts Biotechnology Council ("MassBio"), Pamela Norton from the Mass Life Sciences Center, and Peter Parker of Lab Central.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/brianmalkin.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href=" https://plus.google.com/u/0/10800237802315383071?rel=author"&gt;Brian J. Malkin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawye9rsblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=brian+malkin&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;During Life Sciences Week, FLH Partner Brian J. Malkin will host &lt;a href="http://www.vencaf.org/2013/04/this-week-april-28-may-4-2013/"&gt;Office Hours&lt;/a&gt; from 3-5pm EST along with several other service providers in the healthcare field.  Mr. Malkin's Office Hours description reads:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;blockquote&gt;Chat with Brian J. Malkin, Partner at Frommer Lawrence &amp; Haug LLP.  Brian specializes in FDA-regulated products, in particular pharmaceutical, biotechnology products and biosimilars. Discuss intellectual property, pathways for FDA approval, as well as life cycle management and due diligence investigations.  Brian frequently speaks on a variety of IP- and FDA-oriented topics, and is editor of the &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/"&gt;FDA Lawyers Blog&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
 &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/the-venture-cafe-hosts-life-sc.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=CIsX2FUGFYw:MH19e-6Jw-U:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=CIsX2FUGFYw:MH19e-6Jw-U:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=CIsX2FUGFYw:MH19e-6Jw-U:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=CIsX2FUGFYw:MH19e-6Jw-U:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=CIsX2FUGFYw:MH19e-6Jw-U:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/CIsX2FUGFYw" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/CIsX2FUGFYw/the-venture-cafe-hosts-life-sc.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/the-venture-cafe-hosts-life-sc.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Biologics</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Meetings</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/the-venture-cafe-hosts-life-sc.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>FDLI's Annual Meeting Features FDA Seeking More Resources and Regulatory Authority and More (Part 2 of 2)</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2012/03/FDLILogo-thumb-300x374-38526.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="Thumbnail image for FDLILogo.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2012/07/FDLILogo-thumb-300x374-38526-thumb-300x374-44738.jpg" width="150" height="187" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;This blog is a second part to a blog here, describing  &lt;a href="http://www.fdli.org/conferences/conference-pages/2013-fdli-annual-conference/overview"&gt;Annual Conference&lt;/a&gt; for the Food and Drug Law Institute ("FDLI") held on April 23 and 24, 2013, its in Washington, D.C.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;On the first day, FLH Partner Brian J. Malkin spoke on a panel discussing the priorities for the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research ("CBER").  The two key CBER presentations came from &lt;a href="http://www.fdli.org/docs/default-document-library/maloney_2013.pdf?sfvrsn=0"&gt;Diane Maloney, J.D..&lt;/a&gt;, Associate Director for Policy, and &lt;a href="http://www.fdli.org/docs/default-document-library/malarkey.pdf?sfvrsn=0"&gt;Mary Malarkey&lt;/a&gt;, Director, Office of Compliance and Biologics Quality.  The panel also included Michael S. Reilly, Executive Director, Alliance for Safe Biologic Medicines, and Mark S. Robbins, Ph.D., Vice President, Clinical Regulatory Affairs, DiaMedica USA, Inc. and was moderated by Scott Cunningham, Partner, Covington &amp; Burling LLP.  A key issue raised by panel was the status of biosimilars.  Reilly, for example, was concerned that there may be misinformation about biosimilars, especially because there is no public information concerning biosimilars applications being considered in the United States.  Malkin asked when FDA planned to issue additional guidance, because FDA's guidance has so far been very general and concerns pre-investigational or pre-biosimilars application stages, not the key issues of interchangeability and naming that have been debated.  Maloney explained that CBER and the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research ("CDER") have been discussing strategy, even though there still have been no filed biosimilar applications, and would issue additional guidances.  At the same time, Malkin and others acknowledged that at the state level, legislators have been passing bills that specifically prohibit substitution of biosimilars for their referenced counterpart, unless FDA deems the biosimilar "interchangeable" and naming issues and more persist.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/brianmalkin.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href=" https://plus.google.com/u/0/10800237802315383071?rel=author"&gt;Brian J. Malkin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawye9rsblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=brian+malkin&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;A question was raised about a pending &lt;a href="http://www.elsevierbi.com/~/media/Supporting%20Documents/The%20Pink%20Sheet/74/18/Abbottcitizenpetition.pdf"&gt;Citizen Petition&lt;/a&gt; that includes an argument that it was a taking for biosimilar applicants to file applications referencing biologic products before the passage of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act ("BPCIA") (March 23, 2010).  In this Petition, Abbott argued that before this date, when biologics license applications ("BLAs") were submitted, their sponsors had "reasonable, investment-backed expectations that the trade secrets in their applications would not be used to approve competing products."  Abbott asserts, therefore, that FDA's use of trade secrets in these BLAs to support biosimilar approvals "would constitute a taking under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  FDA should not implement the BPCIA in any manner that would raise constitutional issue."  While most panel members declined to respond, Malkin hazarded a guess that based on comments FDA has made  (see for example &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2012/06/fda-townhall-at-bio-2012.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;) and in the context of FDA's &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/Takings%20CP%20Response%20505%28b%29%282%29.pdf"&gt;Citizen Petition response&lt;/a&gt; for a similar issue concerning 505(b)(2) new drug applications (where a similar takings argument has been made), FDA wanted to decide that there was no "taking," but FDA has not answered the petition in part because no biosimilar application has been filed to date.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/fdlis-annual-meeting-features-1.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=kiMv5R1Zr9w:IjOqY2CUYh0:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=kiMv5R1Zr9w:IjOqY2CUYh0:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=kiMv5R1Zr9w:IjOqY2CUYh0:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=kiMv5R1Zr9w:IjOqY2CUYh0:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=kiMv5R1Zr9w:IjOqY2CUYh0:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/kiMv5R1Zr9w" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/kiMv5R1Zr9w/fdlis-annual-meeting-features-1.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/fdlis-annual-meeting-features-1.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Biologics</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Biosimilars</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Exclusivity</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Meetings</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2013 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/fdlis-annual-meeting-features-1.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>FDLI's Annual Meeting Features FDA Seeking More Resources and Regulatory Authority and More (Part 1 of 2)</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2012/03/FDLILogo-thumb-300x374-38526.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="Thumbnail image for FDLILogo.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2012/07/FDLILogo-thumb-300x374-38526-thumb-300x374-44738.jpg" width="150" height="187" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;On April 23 and 24, 2013, the Food and Drug Law Institute ("FDLI") held its &lt;a href="http://www.fdli.org/conferences/conference-pages/2013-fdli-annual-conference/overview"&gt;Annual Conference&lt;/a&gt; in Washington, D.C.  As expected, FDLI's Conference featured the FDA Commissioner, Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D., presentations from leaders from all of FDA's Centers and the Chief Counsel, Elizabeth Dickinson, and leaders from industry, academia, and the legal bar.  Unlike previous years, however, there were far fewer FDA attendees due to budget cuts, and FDA seemed more reluctant to use the Conference as a platform for announcing new policy or initiatives.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Hamburg kicked off the Conference with her recognition that FDA's budget was cut, along with other government agencies, noting that it would make times tight but that there are no planned furloughs.  Hamburg said that this fiscal year, FDA lost about $209 million-$126 million in budget authority and $83 million in user fees.  FDA will continue to collect user fees, but FDA cannot use them this fiscal year due to the sequesteration issue.  Hamburg said that the reduced budget would mean reductions in programs but did not specify which ones.  Yet, at the same time, Hamburg emphasized that FDA has been busy implementing its new regulatory authorities, including the new Center for Tobacco Products and authorities in the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act ("FDASIA").&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/brianmalkin.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href=" https://plus.google.com/u/0/10800237802315383071?rel=author"&gt;Brian J. Malkin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawye9rsblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=brian+malkin&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Hamburg stressed that it has become more and more apparent that its regulated industries need to build quality in their products.  She highlighted that quality issues have caused two out of three drug shortages, and FDA has uncovered "shockingly unsafe drugs" at compounding pharmacies.  Over the past several months, Hamburg explained, FDA has been inspecting compounding pharmacies and has found unidentified black particles in what were supposed to be sterile injectable products, rust and mold in sterile rooms, and products being processed with bare hands.  At the same time, FDA has encountered increased resistance during its inspections, resulting in at least two cases needing administrative warrants.  Hamburg said that FDA believes there should be a distinction between traditional and nontraditional compounding--traditional is individualized to patient; nontraditional is sterile product prepared out of state compounded and anticipated without a prescription.  For nontraditional compounding, FDA has asked Congress for more clear FDA authority to monitor and examine records in the "patchwork" of compounding rules.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/fdlis-annual-meeting-features.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=3OusS38jQwk:pVKK9gblWNo:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=3OusS38jQwk:pVKK9gblWNo:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=3OusS38jQwk:pVKK9gblWNo:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=3OusS38jQwk:pVKK9gblWNo:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=3OusS38jQwk:pVKK9gblWNo:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/3OusS38jQwk" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/3OusS38jQwk/fdlis-annual-meeting-features.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/fdlis-annual-meeting-features.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Enforcement</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Meetings</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Organization</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 17:01:17 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/fdlis-annual-meeting-features.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Generic Oxycontin®--Abuse Resistance Required Says FDA</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/mortar%20and%20pestle.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="mortar and pestle.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/04/mortar and pestle-thumb-300x198-63622.jpg" width="300" height="198" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;The U.S. Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") &lt;a href="http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm348252.htm"&gt;announced&lt;/a&gt; last Tuesday that it would not approve any generic versions of the original formulation of the prescription narcotic painkiller OxyContin® ("original Oxycontin®").  OxyContin® is a brand name for oxycodone hydrochloride, an opiate-based pain medication.  Original Oxycontin® has been marketed by Purdue Pharma since 1995 and is notorious for its user misuse and abuse.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;OxyContin® contains a large amount of oxycodone because it is designed to release the pain-relieving drug over an extended 12-hour period.  However, original Oxycontin® can easily be crushed and then snorted or injected (or even sprinkled on food) to produce a rapid and intense euphoric high.  The abuse of original OxyContin® in this manner can lead to addiction and dependence and has &lt;a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/16/us-oxycontin-label-idUSBRE93F1F920130416"&gt;reportedly&lt;/a&gt; earned the product the nickname "hillbilly heroin."  Its accessibility has magnified abuse rates; &lt;a href="http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/PostmarketDrugSafetyInformationforPatientsandProviders/ucm207196.htm"&gt;FDA reports&lt;/a&gt; that half a million people over age twelve began using original OxyContin® for non-medicinal purposes in 2008 alone.  According to the &lt;a href="http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2011/p1101_flu_pain_killer_overdose.html"&gt;Center for Disease Control&lt;/a&gt;, the death toll from prescription painkiller overdoses tripled in the first decade of the 21st century, and such overdoses "now kill more Americans than heroin and cocaine combined."&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt; &lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/rachaelmcclure.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt; &lt;p class="authorname"&gt; Written by &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/rachel-mcclure.html"&gt;Rachael P. McClure&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=rachael+mcclure&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt; &lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In addition to a patent for original OxyContin, which expired on Tuesday, Purdue Pharma also owns a patent for a reformulated, abuse-deterring version ("reformulated Oxycontin®").  This newer version was designed to resist being crushed and to form a gel that is difficult to inject when dissolved.  Notably, FDA approved an updated label for this product last week, specifying the tablets' crush-resistant properties and warning of the fatal risks of misuse.  (The label information is available &lt;a href="http://www.purduepharma.com/news-media/2013/04/fda-approves-new-label-for-reformulated-oxycontin-oxycodone-hcl-controlled-release-tablets-cii/"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.)  Purdue withdrew original OxyContin® from the market when its new version was approved in 2010 but retained the trade name. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/generic-oxycontin--abuse-resis.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=bOIQ4N7kiBA:Ot3HwBJwF4A:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=bOIQ4N7kiBA:Ot3HwBJwF4A:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=bOIQ4N7kiBA:Ot3HwBJwF4A:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=bOIQ4N7kiBA:Ot3HwBJwF4A:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=bOIQ4N7kiBA:Ot3HwBJwF4A:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/bOIQ4N7kiBA" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/bOIQ4N7kiBA/generic-oxycontin--abuse-resis.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/generic-oxycontin--abuse-resis.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Citizen Petitions</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Generics</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Human Drugs</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Labeling</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 16:23:57 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/generic-oxycontin--abuse-resis.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>FLH Partner Brian J. Malkin Speaks at FDLI's Annual Conference on CBER Breakout Panel Next Week</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/FDLILogo.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="FDLILogo.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2012/03/FDLILogo-thumb-300x374-38526.jpg" width="150" height="180" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;Next week, FLH Partner Brian J. Malkin will speak at Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research ("CBER") Panel at FDLI's &lt;a href="http://www.fdli.org/conferences/conference-pages/2013-fdli-annual-conference/overview"&gt;Annual Meeting&lt;/a&gt; held in Washington, D.C. on April 23-24.  The CBER Panel will be held on the first day of the Conference, Tuesday, April 23, from 2-3:30 p.m.  FDLI has posted the key two presentations by CBER Representatives &lt;a href="http://www.fdli.org/docs/default-document-library/maloney_2013.pdf?sfvrsn=0"&gt;Diane Maloney, Esq&lt;/a&gt;., Associate Director for Policy, and &lt;a href="http://www.fdli.org/docs/default-document-library/malarkey.pdf?sfvrsn=0"&gt;Mary Malarkey&lt;/a&gt;, Director, Office of Compliance and Biologics Quality.  The panel will be moderated by Scott Cunningham, Partner, Covington &amp; Burling LLP, and also includes Michael S. Reilly, Executive Director, Alliance for Safe Biologic Medicines, and Mark S. Robbins, Ph.D., Vice President, Clinical Regulatory Affairs, DiaMedica USA, Inc.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;As demonstrated by the presentations already posted by Maloney and Malarkey, the panel has a lot of ground to cover, and we as panel members have been providing feedback for additional topics to address as time permits.  All of us hope for a lively discussion following the initial presentations and hope to see you there!&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/brianmalkin.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href=" https://plus.google.com/u/0/10800237802315383071?rel=author"&gt;Brian J. Malkin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawye9rsblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=brian+malkin&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;FDLI's Annual Conference is the largest (750+ attendees expected) and longest running conference for the FDA-regulated industry, which now includes tobacco products.  FDLI's program brings together experts from the Federal Government, industry, private sector bar, consulting organizations, and academia in one place to discuss legal, regulatory, policy, and economic issues falling in FDA's vast authority.  FDA Commissioner, Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D., will provide the Keynote Address the first day, with other plenary sessions featuring FDA's top regulatory and compliance officials, breakouts for all of FDA's centers and a sessions featuring compliance and liability issues.  The next day features top cases in food and drug law, concurrent breakouts in emerging issues, an address from FDA's Chief Counsel, Elizabeth Dickinson, and plenary sessions in interagency dynamics and the role of the media in food and drug law, regulation, and policy.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/flh-partner-brian-j-malkin-spe-12.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=hfukOYoSbvQ:Y8YyInOX93c:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=hfukOYoSbvQ:Y8YyInOX93c:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=hfukOYoSbvQ:Y8YyInOX93c:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=hfukOYoSbvQ:Y8YyInOX93c:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=hfukOYoSbvQ:Y8YyInOX93c:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/hfukOYoSbvQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/hfukOYoSbvQ/flh-partner-brian-j-malkin-spe-12.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/flh-partner-brian-j-malkin-spe-12.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Biologics</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Meetings</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2013 12:45:54 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/flh-partner-brian-j-malkin-spe-12.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>European Clinical Trials Report Issued by European Medicines Agency</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/EMA%20Logo.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="EMA Logo.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2011/05/EMA Logo-thumb-300x144-19874.jpg" width="300" height="144" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;The European Medicines Agency ("EMA") has released their &lt;a href="http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Other/2009/12/WC500016819.pdf"&gt;report&lt;/a&gt; giving detailed information regarding numbers of patients, sites and inspections with respect to pivotal clinical trials submitted in marketing authorization applications ("MAA") between January 2005 and December 2011.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;As we noted in a previous &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=howard%20rosenberg&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;limit=10&amp;page=2"&gt;blog&lt;/a&gt; there has been an increase in concern amongst regulators and the public about how well clinical trials are conducted from an ethical and scientific/organizational standpoint, and especially with regard to good clinical practice ("GCP") compliance.  An applicant has to provide information in every MAA regarding the location, conduct and ethical standards applied in respect of the clinical trials conducted in third countries.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/howardrosenberg.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/howard-e-rosenberg.html"&gt;Howard E. Rosenberg, Ph.D.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=howard+rosenberg&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;  

&lt;p&gt;The report relates mainly to new applications (485), line extensions (95), and variations where new clinical trial information was provided (97).  Generic applications are included as part of the new applications, but they generally do not add much to the number of patients, because these applications are mainly based on small bioequivalence trials, but they do provide information on the locations where these trials were conducted.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/european-clinical-trials-repor.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=9TSdvfIMHEo:LfiZuT57-lo:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=9TSdvfIMHEo:LfiZuT57-lo:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=9TSdvfIMHEo:LfiZuT57-lo:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=9TSdvfIMHEo:LfiZuT57-lo:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=9TSdvfIMHEo:LfiZuT57-lo:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/9TSdvfIMHEo" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/9TSdvfIMHEo/european-clinical-trials-repor.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/european-clinical-trials-repor.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Clinical Trials</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">European Drug Law</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">European Union</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2013 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/european-clinical-trials-repor.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Myriad Hits Supreme Court with Oral Arguments</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/supreme%20court.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="supreme court.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/04/supreme court-thumb-300x201-63200.jpg" width="300" height="201" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;On April 15, the U.S. Supreme Court heard &lt;a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/12-398-amc7.pdf"&gt;oral arguments&lt;/a&gt; in Assoc. for &lt;a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/11-725.htm"&gt;Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. et al.&lt;/a&gt;, the famous case concerning the patent-eligibility of human gene patents.   At issue is the validity of Myriad's patents on the human genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2, but ruling would surely cover the patent eligibility of all animal and plant genes and impact various biotechnology industries.  Additional details may be found in previous blogs, for instance &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2012/12/aclus-myriad-genetics-appeal-t.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2011/08/myriad-decision-by-federal-cir.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The Justices appeared skeptical of Myriad's argument that isolated DNA is patent-eligible subject matter.  Isolated DNA is DNA that is cut from a chromosome, resulting in an "isolated" piece of DNA that has the same nucleotide sequence as the naturally-occurring genomic DNA.  &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt; &lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/danconstantinescu.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt; &lt;p class="authorname"&gt; Written by &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/dan-constantinescu-phd.html"&gt;Dan Constantinescu, Ph.D.&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=dan+constantinescu&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt; &lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The Justices compared Myriad's isolated DNA to the discovery of plants with medicinal properties.  Justice Breyer commented that it was long-standing patent law that while particular applications of such a plant can be patented, the plant cannot be.  If someone discovers a medicinal plant "he gets a patent on the process, on the use of the thing, but not the thing itself."  Justice Sotomayor expressed her understanding that to obtain a patent "you had to take something and add to what nature does" and wondered, "how do you add to nature when all you are doing is copying its sequence?"&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/myriad-hits-supreme-court-with.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=-10BIrXvfdw:H5AyxEjiNMc:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=-10BIrXvfdw:H5AyxEjiNMc:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=-10BIrXvfdw:H5AyxEjiNMc:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=-10BIrXvfdw:H5AyxEjiNMc:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=-10BIrXvfdw:H5AyxEjiNMc:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/-10BIrXvfdw" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/-10BIrXvfdw/myriad-hits-supreme-court-with.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/myriad-hits-supreme-court-with.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Litigation</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Patents</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 14:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/myriad-hits-supreme-court-with.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Biosimilars and "Pay-for-Delay" Settlements on the Table in White House's Proposed Budget</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/Obamabudget.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="Obamabudget.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/04/Obamabudget-thumb-300x366-63065.jpg" width="300" height="366" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;Over the past months, there has been a lot of speculation (see recent blogs &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/fda-budget-sequester-looms-in-1.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; , &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/02/fda-budget-sequester-looms-in.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2012/09/user-fee-sequestration-looming.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;) whether the White House's proposed budget would cause a sequester situation for FDA, resulting in potential layoffs or program cuts, in an era of new user fees for generic drugs and biosimilar biological products.  While initial reports and temporary budget fixes (called continuing resolutions) appeared to keep FDA's user fees intact and available for use, FDA's Commissioner, Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D., &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/massbio-features-hamburg-keyno.html"&gt;recently reported&lt;/a&gt; to members of a biotechnology trade association, the Massachusetts Biotechnology Council ("MassBio"), that it was not clear what would happen with user fees in the new federal budget.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Released on April 10, the White House's &lt;a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Overview/"&gt;proposed fiscal year 2014 budget&lt;/a&gt; is a mixed bag that &lt;a href="http://www.mmm-online.com/obama-budget-would-bleed-pharmas/article/288302/"&gt;has been called&lt;/a&gt; a "political document rather than a serious piece of legislation" with a "series of bargaining positions" that "would bleed pharma."  On the one hand, the plan would appear to confirm that FDA's user fees would not be sequestered, given that it supported the $4.7 billion in total program budget &lt;a href="http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/Reports/BudgetReports/UCM347422.pdf"&gt;requested by FDA&lt;/a&gt;, which included user fees that would help fund over 90 percent of the requested increases.  On the other hand, the budget includes a myriad of proposals that would change the way the government pays for medical care and products.  For example, Medicare (senior citizens' drug coverage) Part D manufacturer discounts for branded drugs would be increased from 50% to 75% in 2015 (rather than 2020) and low-income individuals would be pushed more to generic drugs by increasing certain copayments for branded drugs and lowering certain copayments for generic drugs.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/brianmalkin.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href=" https://plus.google.com/u/0/10800237802315383071?rel=author"&gt;Brian J. Malkin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawye9rsblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=brian+malkin&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Many of the more controversial proposals were nestled in a document called &lt;a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2014/assets/reducing.pdf"&gt;"Reducing the Deficit in a Smart and Balanced Way"&lt;/a&gt;. Here, the White House proposes, among other things, several items to purportedly lower drug costs, including: 1) authorizing the Federal Trade Commission to stop companies from entering into certain "pay-for-delay" agreements (see below) and 2) beginning in 2014, to reduce biologic product exclusivity from 12 years to 7 years and prohibit additional periods of exclusivity for minor changes to product formulations.  These two items could open up some unanticipated debate regarding the White House's budget.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/biosimilars-and-pay-for-delay.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=FTSSU5HU_vU:gL6VBf1yumg:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=FTSSU5HU_vU:gL6VBf1yumg:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=FTSSU5HU_vU:gL6VBf1yumg:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=FTSSU5HU_vU:gL6VBf1yumg:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=FTSSU5HU_vU:gL6VBf1yumg:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/FTSSU5HU_vU" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/FTSSU5HU_vU/biosimilars-and-pay-for-delay.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/biosimilars-and-pay-for-delay.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Biologics</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Biosimilars</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Generics</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Human Drugs</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Legislation</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Litigation</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Patents</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/biosimilars-and-pay-for-delay.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Orphan Drug Prices Challenged in Europe - Will the U.S. Follow?</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/eurosdollars.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="eurosdollars.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/04/eurosdollars-thumb-300x199-63010.jpg" width="300" height="199" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;On April 7, Simeon Bennett from &lt;a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-07/orphan-drug-prices-under-siege-in-austerity-minded-europe.html"&gt;Bloomberg&lt;/a&gt; reported that individual members of the European Union are attempting to control the cost of medical care by containing the reimbursement of drugs intended for smaller patient populations, generally called orphan drugs.  In Europe, orphan drugs are defined as a medicine to treat no more than 5 in 10,000 inhabitants.  Many of these drugs undergo a centralized approval process via the European Medicines Agency (see related blog resource page &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/00827190.PDF"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.) In practice, however, these drugs may only reach the market when each member state decides that its national health system will reimburse for the drug.  For &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orphan_drug"&gt;example&lt;/a&gt;, 35 orphan drugs reached the market in Belgium, 44 in the Netherlands, and 28 in Sweden in 2008. 35 such drugs reached the market in France and 23 in Italy in 2007.  &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-07/orphan-drug-prices-under-siege-in-austerity-minded-europe.html"&gt;According to Yann Le Cam&lt;/a&gt;, CEO of Eurodis, a French patient advocacy group for patients with rare diseases, "The price of orphan medicinal products is under much more debate.  We have seen countries which were providing good access to orphan medicinal products now questioning the continuation of reimbursement."  &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/brianmalkin.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href=" https://plus.google.com/u/0/10800237802315383071?rel=author"&gt;Brian J. Malkin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawye9rsblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=brian+malkin&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Some examples provided in the Bloomberg report included the Netherlands demanding price reductions for certain therapies such as Sanofi's Myozyme® (alglucosidase alfa), an enzyme replacement therapy for patients with Pompe disease, which costs 700,000 euros ($909,000).  As we previously reported from &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/massbio-features-biosimilars-a.html"&gt;MassBio's Annual Meeting&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://www.genzyme.com/promos/pompe-movie.aspx"&gt;Myozyme®&lt;/a&gt; was the largest research and development effort in the history of Genzyme, which was later acquired by Sanofi, and the result of a concerned father of two children with Pompe's disease pushing the promising therapy along to help it reach the public.  Another example mentioned in the report included Ireland recommending against the government paying for Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s Kalydeco® (ivacaftor) for cystic fibrosis until the company significantly reduced the price for the drug product.  Yet another example was the rejection by the United Kingdom ("UK") to expand use of Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s drug Soliris® (eculizumab) for two blood disorders, despite the recommendation for this use by an advisory panel.  Instead, the government referred the matter to its National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, which we recently blogged on &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/uks-nice-role-for-value-based.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, as an instrument to encourage value-based medicine in the UK.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/orphan-drug-prices-challenged.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=QbzQc9tIz18:Q2M0v3dsMC0:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=QbzQc9tIz18:Q2M0v3dsMC0:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=QbzQc9tIz18:Q2M0v3dsMC0:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=QbzQc9tIz18:Q2M0v3dsMC0:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=QbzQc9tIz18:Q2M0v3dsMC0:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/QbzQc9tIz18" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/QbzQc9tIz18/orphan-drug-prices-challenged.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/orphan-drug-prices-challenged.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">European Union</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Human Drugs</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Orphan Drugs</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Wed, 10 Apr 2013 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/orphan-drug-prices-challenged.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>OTC Nicotine Replacement Therapies - Citizen Petition Answered</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/nicotine.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="nicotine.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2010/09/nicotine-thumb-300x400-10183.jpg" width="300" height="400" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;"itemprop="image" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;On April 1, FDA provided a &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/OTC%20NRT%20CP%20Response.pdf"&gt;combined response&lt;/a&gt; to three citizen petitions concerning the regulation of over-the-counter ("OTC") nicotine replacement therapy ("NRT") drug products.  The petitions were submitted by the Commissioner of Health, New York State Department of Health (Docket No.&lt;a href="http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FDA-2008-P-0116-0001"&gt; FDA-2008-P-0116&lt;/a&gt;), the Director, Legal Resource Center for Tobacco Regulation, Litigation &amp; Advocacy, University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law on behalf of the Association for the Treatment of Tobacco Use and Dependence ("ATTUD") and the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco ("SRNT") (FDA Docket No. &lt;a href="http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FDA-2008-P-0116-0001"&gt;FDA-2008-P-0116&lt;/a&gt;), and four not-for-profit organizations, the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, the American Lung Association, the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, and the American Legacy Foundation (FDA Docket No. &lt;a href="http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FDA-2010-P-0454-0001"&gt;FDA-2010-P-0454&lt;/a&gt;).  For additional background on this topic generally, please see an earlier blog that we posted &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2010/09/nicotine-replacement-therapy-p.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; about a NRT workshop that FDA held in October 2010 addressing the topics in these petitions.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/brianmalkin.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href=" https://plus.google.com/u/0/10800237802315383071?rel=author"&gt;Brian J. Malkin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawye9rsblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=brian+malkin&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The petitioners asked FDA to consider modifying the labeling of OTC NRTs, certain policy changes, and allowing greater access to the products.  While the requests varied, a common theme was that the petitioners wanted consumers to have greater access to NRTs in smaller packages that would permit more flexible use of the products, other than the typical up-to-12-weeks smoking cessation program scenario contemplated by the clinical studies that supported the use of these products.  For instance, some of the petitioners suggested that the labeling should include additional risk/benefit information concerning NRTs versus continued cigarette (or other tobacco product) use, including possible concomitant use of cigarettes and NRTs, as well as longer-term NRT use to reduce and perhaps ultimately eliminate an individual's cigarette use.  The not-for-profit petitioners wanted FDA to make the development of NRTs a priority within FDA, including certain collaborations with manufacturers of NRTs, such as the development of appropriate trial designs, and to transfer evaluation of NRTs from FDA's drug division for addiction drug products to its division for oncology drug products.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/otc-nicotine-replacement-thera.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=EhT0LYLfdVs:Fq6lfAJepKU:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=EhT0LYLfdVs:Fq6lfAJepKU:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=EhT0LYLfdVs:Fq6lfAJepKU:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=EhT0LYLfdVs:Fq6lfAJepKU:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=EhT0LYLfdVs:Fq6lfAJepKU:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/EhT0LYLfdVs" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/EhT0LYLfdVs/otc-nicotine-replacement-thera.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/otc-nicotine-replacement-thera.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Citizen Petitions</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Human Drugs</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Tobacco Products</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2013 10:13:23 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/otc-nicotine-replacement-thera.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Clinical Trials Transparency</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/clinical%20trials.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="clinical trials.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2012/01/clinical trials-thumb-300x329-33619.jpg" width="300" height="329" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
For some time now, there have been strident calls for the publishing of all clinical trial data.  The pressure has arisen due to revelations that companies may have hidden crucial clinical data that might have shown that the drug being tested was not as efficacious or even as safe as they appeared from quoted trial results (see, for instance, a previous blog &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2012/04/clinical-data-transparency-con.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;).  The campaign group &lt;a href="http://www.alltrials.net/"&gt;AllTrials&lt;/a&gt; has brought together several people and groups (including for example David Tovey, editor The Cochrane Library; &lt;a href="http://www.badscience.net/"&gt;Ben Goldacre&lt;/a&gt; (book &lt;em&gt;Bad Pharma&lt;/em&gt;); Carl Heneghan, Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Oxford) because, as they put it: &lt;blockquote&gt;Around half of all clinical trials have not been published; some trials have not even been registered.  If action is not taken urgently, information on what was done and what was found in trials could be lost forever, leading to bad treatment decisions, missed opportunities for good medicine, and trials being repeated unnecessarily.&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Key publications like the &lt;a href="http://www.bmj.com/tamiflu"&gt;British Medical Journal&lt;/a&gt; and research bodies such as the &lt;a href="http://www.insight.mrc.ac.uk/2013/04/04/make-all-research-results-public/#more-1955"&gt;Medical Research Council&lt;/a&gt; and the &lt;a href="http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/About-us/Policy/Policy-and-position-statements/WTD002765.htm"&gt;Wellcome Trust&lt;/a&gt; agree, the trust encouraging its grant recipients to release their trial data. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/howardrosenberg.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/howard-e-rosenberg.html"&gt;Howard E. Rosenberg, Ph.D.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=howard+rosenberg&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;  

&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href="http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/special_topics/general/general_content_000555.jsp&amp;mid=WC0b01ac0580607bfa"&gt;European Medicines Agency ("EMA")&lt;/a&gt; has been looking at this for some time, with the same aim in mind and is trying to develop a workable policy to enable the data to be published.  Indeed it is thought that in the next few weeks, major players in the United Kingdom's medical community will meet to try and take things further in a more practical manner.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/clinical-trials-transparency.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=EVzjoVaojas:OxbUFGAQ14w:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=EVzjoVaojas:OxbUFGAQ14w:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=EVzjoVaojas:OxbUFGAQ14w:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=EVzjoVaojas:OxbUFGAQ14w:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=EVzjoVaojas:OxbUFGAQ14w:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/EVzjoVaojas" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/EVzjoVaojas/clinical-trials-transparency.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/clinical-trials-transparency.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Clinical Trials</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">European Drug Law</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">European Union</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Fri, 05 Apr 2013 16:35:28 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/clinical-trials-transparency.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>UK's NICE To Have the Crucial Role in the Value-Based Pricing of Medicines from 2014</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/Bristish%20Notes.png"&gt;&lt;img alt="Bristish Notes.png" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/04/Bristish Notes-thumb-300x225-62476.png" width="300" height="225" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;The United Kingdom's ("UK's") method of controlling the prices its Department of Health pays for innovative medicines has been, up until now, the Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme ("PPRS").  The PPRS has been a voluntary scheme run over many years between the Department of Health and the branded pharmaceutical industry represented by the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry ("ABPI").  Its objective was to deliver the provision of safe and effective medicines at reasonable prices to the National Health Service ("NHS") while promoting innovation, the rapid uptake of new clinically and cost effective medicines, and in a sustainable manner.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Over recent years, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence ("NICE") has been taking on a more visible and key role.  Its job has been to improve outcomes for people using the NHS by producing evidence-based guidance by way of advice to healthcare professionals and to develop quality standards and measures for those providing health care services and also providing information to practitioners and managers in both health and social care.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/howardrosenberg.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/howard-e-rosenberg.html"&gt;Howard E. Rosenberg, Ph.D.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=howard+rosenberg&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt; 

&lt;p&gt;The UK Government's response to the Health Select Committee &lt;a href="http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm85/8568/8568.pdf"&gt;report&lt;/a&gt; of 2012-2013 on NICE was to re-establish NICE as a new statutory body giving it a key position in the healthcare system.  It gives NICE the role of deciding the value-based pricing of medicines.  Thus, value-based pricing will replace the current PPRS, when it expires in January 2014.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/uks-nice-role-for-value-based.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=dlg3b1TgoJI:FrCpE6ynrCU:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=dlg3b1TgoJI:FrCpE6ynrCU:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=dlg3b1TgoJI:FrCpE6ynrCU:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=dlg3b1TgoJI:FrCpE6ynrCU:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=dlg3b1TgoJI:FrCpE6ynrCU:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/dlg3b1TgoJI" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/dlg3b1TgoJI/uks-nice-role-for-value-based.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/uks-nice-role-for-value-based.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Biologics</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">European Union</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Human Drugs</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2013 15:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/uks-nice-role-for-value-based.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Biosimilar Meeting Guidance Issued by FDA</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/dna.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="dna.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2010/08/dna-thumb-300x278-8294.jpg" width="300" height="278" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;On April 1, FDA issued a &lt;a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/04/01/2013-07445/draft-guidance-for-industry-on-formal-meetings-between-fda-and-biosimilar-biological-product"&gt;Federal Register&lt;/a&gt; Notice announcing a new draft biosimilars guidance, "&lt;a href="http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM345649.pdf"&gt;Formal Meetings Between the FDA and Biosimilar Biological Product Sponsors or Applicants&lt;/a&gt;". This is the latest in FDA's new biosimilar guidances for 2013, which FDA has announced in earlier meetings this year would be coming to help spur the filing of a biosimilars application, which FDA has called 351(k) applications based on the section in the Public Health Service Act ("PHS Act").  As of a few weeks ago at the Massachusetts Biotechnology Association's ("MassBio's") Annual Meeting, which we blogged on &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/massbio-features-hamburg-keyno.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, FDA's Commissioner, Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D., continued to report that FDA has not received a single 351(k) application to date.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/brianmalkin.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href=" https://plus.google.com/u/0/10800237802315383071?rel=author"&gt;Brian J. Malkin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawye9rsblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=brian+malkin&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The Guidance focuses on formal meetings for 351(k) applications and the associated requirements or performance goals from the Biosimilar User Fee Act of 2012 ("BsUFA"), which was enacted as part of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act ("FDASIA").  In particular, the Guidance discusses the principles of good meeting management practices ("GMMPs") and describes standardized procedures for requesting, preparing, scheduling, conducting, and documenting such formal meetings.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/biosimilar-meeting-guidance-is.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=Ah8aXd3BMGY:J56QOFFDbVQ:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=Ah8aXd3BMGY:J56QOFFDbVQ:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=Ah8aXd3BMGY:J56QOFFDbVQ:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=Ah8aXd3BMGY:J56QOFFDbVQ:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=Ah8aXd3BMGY:J56QOFFDbVQ:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/Ah8aXd3BMGY" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/Ah8aXd3BMGY/biosimilar-meeting-guidance-is.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/biosimilar-meeting-guidance-is.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Biologics</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Biosimilars</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Guidance</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2013 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/04/biosimilar-meeting-guidance-is.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Judge Pender Featured at ITC Trial Lawyer's Association Luncheon</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/ITC%20Building.png"&gt;&lt;img alt="ITC Building.png" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/04/ITC Building-thumb-300x225-62533.png" width="300" height="225" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;On March 27, FLH attorneys Brian Malkin and Christopher Gosselin attended the International Trade Commission ("ITC") Trial Lawyer's Association ("&lt;a href="http://www.itctla.org/"&gt;ITCTLA&lt;/a&gt;") luncheon with administrative law judge ("ALJ") &lt;a href="http://www.usitc.gov/press_room/alj_thomas_pender.htm"&gt;Thomas B. Pender&lt;/a&gt;.  Judge Pender joined the ITC in October, 2011, and is one of six ALJs at the Commission.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Judge Pender arrived at the luncheon with a number of themes that he wanted to discuss.  Chief among them is a concern shared by many other ALJs and district court judges about the scope of electronic discovery in today's litigation.  He urged the practitioners in the room not to lose control of the paper, and to reign in the costs and scope of electronic discovery.  In Pender's experience, less than 1% of all discovery becomes an exhibit, and less than 5% of those exhibits are ever argued.  In addition to paring back discovery, Pender would like to see fewer patents and patent claims being asserted by complainants.  Ultimately, Pender would like to see more efforts taken to reduce the cost of litigation at the ITC, and hopes that more streamlined cases will allow him to finish an Initial Determination in a year or less.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/christophergosselin.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/christopher-gosselin.html"&gt;Christopher Gosselin &lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=christopher+gosselin&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;  

&lt;p&gt;Judge Pender also suggested, on a related note, that big firms make an effort to send their associates "to the podium," both to give the associates valuable experience, and to reduce the cost of a trial.  In his experience, well-prepared associates perform as well or better than partners who had less time to prepare.  Pender cautioned parties to think twice before betting an entire case on one witness, and suggested that secondary witnesses could and should be handled by associates.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/judge-pender-featured-at-itc-t.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=q3SrJ3-Cp9w:cG6F7ZiPZ2w:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=q3SrJ3-Cp9w:cG6F7ZiPZ2w:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=q3SrJ3-Cp9w:cG6F7ZiPZ2w:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=q3SrJ3-Cp9w:cG6F7ZiPZ2w:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=q3SrJ3-Cp9w:cG6F7ZiPZ2w:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/q3SrJ3-Cp9w" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/q3SrJ3-Cp9w/judge-pender-featured-at-itc-t.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/judge-pender-featured-at-itc-t.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">International Trade Commission</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Litigation</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Patents</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2013 09:39:04 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/judge-pender-featured-at-itc-t.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Supreme Court Hears Androgel® Reverse Payments Case</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/supreme%20court.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="supreme court.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/04/supreme court-thumb-300x298-63200.jpg" width="300" height="298" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;On March 25, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court heard &lt;a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/12-416.pdf"&gt;oral argument&lt;/a&gt; in the Federal Trade Commission's ("FTC's") case challenging the Hatch-Waxman patent settlements Solvay (now owned by Abbot Laboratories) entered into with Watson Pharmaceuticals, Par Pharmaceutical, and Paddock Laboratories resolving their disputes involving Solvay's testosterone-replacement drug AndroGel®.  The so-called reverse-payment settlements at issue in  &lt;a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/12-416.htm"&gt;&lt;em&gt;FTC v. Actavis, Inc.&lt;/em&gt;, Sup. Ct. No. 12-416&lt;/a&gt; ("AndroGel") involved the generic manufacturers' agreements to abandon their patent challenges and delay generic entry for nine years.  The settlements also involved Solvay making certain payments to the generic manufacturers in return for backup manufacturing and marketing support.  For additional background information, please see some of our more recent blogs &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/02/pay-for-delay-ama-opines-shoul.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2012/12/us-supreme-court-to-review-ele.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2012/10/pay-for-delay-us-supreme-court.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The issue before the Court is whether reverse-payment settlements are per se lawful unless the underlying patent litigation was a sham or the patent was obtained by fraud (as the Eleventh and other circuits have held), or instead are presumptively anticompetitive and unlawful (as the Third Circuit held in &lt;em&gt;K-Dur&lt;/em&gt;).  &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/justinedonahue.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href="http://www.flhlaw.com/donahue"&gt;Justine K. Donahue
&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=justine+donahue&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;    	

&lt;p&gt;Deputy U.S. Solicitor General Malcolm L. Stewart argued on behalf of the FTC that the Court should adopt a "quick look" rule of reason analysis under the antitrust laws whereby reverse-payment settlements will be presumptively anticompetitive unless defendants can show that the payment from the brand to the generic was for a purpose other than delaying generic entry, or the payment offered some pro-competitive benefit.  Notably, this quick look approach was adopted by the Third Circuit in &lt;em&gt;K-Dur&lt;/em&gt;.  Counsel for the respondent drug companies argued that the Court should adopt the "scope of the patent defense" applied by the Second, Eleventh, and Federal Circuits finding these agreements to be lawful absent sham litigation or fraud in obtaining the patent.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/supreme-court-hears-androgel-r.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=chEh9IkjM1I:CuTI6bU36HY:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=chEh9IkjM1I:CuTI6bU36HY:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=chEh9IkjM1I:CuTI6bU36HY:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=chEh9IkjM1I:CuTI6bU36HY:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=chEh9IkjM1I:CuTI6bU36HY:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/chEh9IkjM1I" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/chEh9IkjM1I/supreme-court-hears-androgel-r.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/supreme-court-hears-androgel-r.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Antitrust</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Generics</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Human Drugs</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Litigation</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:29:01 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/supreme-court-hears-androgel-r.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>OGD Director Resigns and Is Replaced by Kathleen Uhl, M.D.</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/FDA logo-thumb-300x225.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="Thumbnail image for FDA logo.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2010/10/FDA logo-thumb-300x225-thumb-300x225-10317.jpg" width="300" height="225" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;In a surprising turn of events, last week FDA's new Office of Generic Drugs ("OGD") Director Gregory P. Geba, M.D., M.P.H., voluntarily stepped down from his post after only about eight months after being &lt;a href="http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/ResourcesForYou/Consumers/BuyingUsingMedicineSafely/UnderstandingGenericDrugs/ucm312287.htm"&gt;announced&lt;/a&gt; as the new Director.  Rather than hiring from within, FDA hired Geba from Sanofi US, where he had previously most recently served as Deputy Chief Medical Officer.  FDA said then, "He [Geba] joins OGD at an opportune time to lead our expanding generic program into a reorganization of both structure and process to improve coordination, communication, and efficiency, as well as enhance the Office's ability to ensure that all generic drugs--which make up nearly 80 percent of prescriptions filled in the United States--are safe, effective, of high quality, and interchangeable with the brand name drug product/reference listed drug."  Around this same time, FDA moved OGD to the same organizational level as the Office of New Drugs ("OND"), called a "Super office," signaling that the two offices now had the same reporting structure directly to the Director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research ("CDER"), Janet Woodcock, M.D., rather than a sub-office, as had previously been the case.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;According to &lt;a href="http://www.law360.com/articles/423840/fda-generic-drug-leader-steps-down-amid-agency-changes"&gt;reports&lt;/a&gt; of an e-mail that Geba sent to FDA staff on March 13, Geba cited the movement of OGD's chemistry divisions into a new Office of Pharmaceutical Quality as one of the lead reasons for his resignation, as well as the relocation of his family to the Washington area.  Geba reportedly wrote:  "As I see it, two of the original reasons I came to [OGD] . . . would be challenged by resources needed for application to other extremely important efforts of the chemistry group in moving to [the Office of Pharmaceutical Quality."  The e-mail explained that while Geba generally supported the transfer of the chemistry group to the Office of Pharmaceutical Quality.  Geba thought, however, that the move could make it difficult for him to achieve his goals to approve generic versions of inhalers, topical creams, and other complex drugs, as well as addressing the importance of pill size, shape, color, and other characteristics to patients.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/brianmalkin.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href=" https://plus.google.com/u/0/108002378023153983071?rel=author"&gt;Brian J. Malkin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=brian+malkin&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Geba helped FDA with its initial phases for implementing the Generic Drug User Fee Act ("GDUFA").  According to Geba, since GDUFA, OGD decreased the abbreviated new drug application ("ANDA") backlog by nearly 600 applications and approved nearly 200 ANDAs since October 2012.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/ogd-director-resigns-and-is-re.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=I0Nwr2ixEC0:w_oYn5sLuCY:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=I0Nwr2ixEC0:w_oYn5sLuCY:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=I0Nwr2ixEC0:w_oYn5sLuCY:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=I0Nwr2ixEC0:w_oYn5sLuCY:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=I0Nwr2ixEC0:w_oYn5sLuCY:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/I0Nwr2ixEC0" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/I0Nwr2ixEC0/ogd-director-resigns-and-is-re.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/ogd-director-resigns-and-is-re.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Generics</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Human Drugs</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Key Officials</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Organization</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 16:31:26 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/ogd-director-resigns-and-is-re.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>MassBio Features Hamburg Keynote at Annual Meeting - Part 2 of 2</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/monoclonal%20antibodies.png"&gt;&lt;img alt="monoclonal antibodies.png" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/03/monoclonal antibodies-thumb-300x199-61695.png" width="300" height="199" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" itemprop="image" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;On March 14-15, the Massachusetts Biotechnology Council ("MassBio") held its &lt;a href="http://www.massbio.org/events/calendar/1796-massbio_annual_meeting/event_detail"&gt;Annual Meeting&lt;/a&gt; in Cambridge, Massachusetts.  The Meeting also featured a &lt;a href="http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Speeches/ucm343949.htm"&gt;Keynote&lt;/a&gt; from FDA Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D. (see related blog &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/massbio-features-biosimilars-a.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;).  Key themes at the Meeting were the importance of the Cambridge/Boston biotechnology community for advancing new therapies and the unique resources available in the area that have made it an industry leader.  Some of the Cambridge/Boston advantages discussed were the intellectual research capital (local universities such as Harvard and Massachusetts Institute of Technology), venture capital, and local biotechnology businesses, such as Biogen Idec and Genzyme, as well as other biotechnology companies that now have offices in the Cambridge/Boston area and are seeking partnerships to develop new products, such as AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Merck, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;On the second day, Hamburg described here "special affection" for the Cambridge/Boston region dating back to her days at Harvard, saying that she hopes D.C. "would be as efficient and congenial as here."  Hamburg said that the Cambridge/Boston region is a life sciences enterprise fueled by top notch research and medical care with the top five NIH-funded hospitals and a "biotech supercluster second to none" with "a remarkable 500 biotech and pharma companies here, and some thirty venture capital firms."&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/brianmalkin.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href=" https://plus.google.com/u/0/10800237802315383071?rel=author"&gt;Brian J. Malkin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawye9rsblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=brian+malkin&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Hamburg described FDA as striving for true collaboration and regulatory flexibility with industry, including MassBio, and has been hearing that industry wants more clarity, certainty, transparency with decisions.  Hamburg said that FDA is trying to have creative approaches--not a one size-fits-all approach.  To this end, Hamburg described approaches that FDA has taken with four new products from the Massachusetts area: 1) Inclusig® for two rare forms of leukemia, 2) Juxtapid® (an orphan drug), 3) Linzess® for irritable bowl syndrome, and 4) Kalydeco® for cystic fibrosis.  In addition, Hamburg highlighted new provisions in the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act ("FDASIA") for expedited approvals, citing 31 breakthrough therapy designation requests, of which 9 have been granted, 10 denied, 11 pending, and 1 withdrawn.  To help with more companies taking advantage of this new process, FDA will be publishing a new guidance shortly, Hamburg announced.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/massbio-features-hamburg-keyno.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=k23mpp-F008:iBRwOtIxmEg:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=k23mpp-F008:iBRwOtIxmEg:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=k23mpp-F008:iBRwOtIxmEg:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=k23mpp-F008:iBRwOtIxmEg:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=k23mpp-F008:iBRwOtIxmEg:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/k23mpp-F008" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/k23mpp-F008/massbio-features-hamburg-keyno.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/massbio-features-hamburg-keyno.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Biologics</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Biosimilars</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Human Drugs</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Meetings</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Orphan Drugs</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Tue, 19 Mar 2013 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/massbio-features-hamburg-keyno.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>MassBio Features Biosimilars and Crowley Keynote at Annual Meeting - Part 1 of 2</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/humanonachip.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="humanonachip.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/03/humanonachip-thumb-300x260-61693.jpg" width="300" height="260" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;On March 14-15, the Massachusetts Biotechnology Council ("MassBio") held its &lt;a href="http://www.massbio.org/events/calendar/1796-massbio_annual_meeting/event_detail"&gt;Annual Meeting&lt;/a&gt; in Cambridge, Massachusetts.  The Meeting featured key topics such as biosimilars and a Keynote from John Crowley, Chairman and CEO of &lt;a href="http://www.amicusrx.com/"&gt;Amicus Therapeutics&lt;/a&gt;.  &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;On the first day of the conference, Crowley exemplified many of the speakers' entry in biotechnology, which originated with a family member or friend with a disease requiring development of a biotechnology product.  For Crowley, it was his two children Megan and Patrick, were diagnosed with a severe neuromuscular disorder, Glycogen storage disease type II, known as Pompe's disease.  Rather that sitting still to wait for a cure, Crowley became involved in the process, first moving to Princeton, New Jersey, to be close to doctors specializing in the disease and leaving his job with Bristol-Myers Squibb.  He later took a position as CEO of Novazyme Pharmaceuticals, a biotechnology research company located in Oklahoma City founded by Dr. William Canfield, which was conducting research on a new experimental treatment for the disease.  Novazyme was acquired by Genzyme Corporation, which was then the world's third largest biotechnology company.  Crowley was put in charge of Genzyme's global Pompe program, becoming the largest research and development effort in the company's history.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/brianmalkin.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href=" https://plus.google.com/u/0/108002378023153983071?rel=author"&gt;Brian J. Malkin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=brian+malkin&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Through these efforts, an experimental enzyme replacement therapy was developed, and Megan and Patrick Crowley received the therapy, which Crowley credits with saving his children's lives.  Crowley went on to become President and CEO of Orexigen Therapeutics and was named the President and CEO of Amicus Therapeutics, based in Cranbury, New Jersey, which he helped take public in 2007.  Crowley's efforts were documented in a Wall Street Journal article and other publications, which ultimately resulted in Harrison Ford working to bring the story to life in a major motion picture, &lt;a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1244659/"&gt;Extraordinary Measures&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/massbio-features-biosimilars-a.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=Xu7tKleKmZA:3_9sq0sc1qA:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=Xu7tKleKmZA:3_9sq0sc1qA:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=Xu7tKleKmZA:3_9sq0sc1qA:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=Xu7tKleKmZA:3_9sq0sc1qA:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=Xu7tKleKmZA:3_9sq0sc1qA:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/Xu7tKleKmZA" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/Xu7tKleKmZA/massbio-features-biosimilars-a.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/massbio-features-biosimilars-a.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Biologics</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Biosimilars</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Human Drugs</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Meetings</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Orphan Drugs</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2013 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/massbio-features-biosimilars-a.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Public Citizen Asks FDA to Withdraw Approval of Stryker's Wingspan Stent--Again</title>
            <description>&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/dariomachleidt.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/dario-a-machleidt.html"&gt;Dario A. Machleidt&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=dario+machleidt&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;   

&lt;p&gt;On January 28, 2013, consumer-advocacy group Public Citizen filed a &lt;a href="http://www.citizen.org/documents/2093.pdf"&gt;letter&lt;/a&gt; "in response" for FDA to reconsider its August 8, 2012 &lt;a href="http://www.citizen.org/documents/1992_and_1994_fda_response_to_petition_on_wingspan_stent_system.pdf"&gt;denial&lt;/a&gt; of the group's &lt;a href="http://www.citizen.org/documents/petition-to-fda-to-withdraw-approval-of-wingspan-stent-system-122111.pdf"&gt;petition&lt;/a&gt; that asked FDA to withdraw its approval for a medical device directed to stent technology.  Public Citizen's original petition urged the withdrawal of approval for and recall of Stryker Corporation's ("Stryker's") Wingspan Stent System with Gateway PTA Balloon Catheter ("Wingspan Stent"), which is used to treat narrowing of the blood vessels in the brain.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/czePqfOnd30" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
In its January 28 letter, Public Citizen claimed that FDA denied the petition based on flawed reasoning.  Specifically, Public Citizen argued that FDA's decision minimized the importance of crucial scientific evidence indicating that the Wingspan Stent is ineffective and, furthermore, that it is more harmful to patients experiencing intracranial narrowing of the blood vessels when compared to alternative forms of treatment.  Public Citizen also criticized FDA's attempt at comprise by narrowing the proposed indication of the stent in response to the scientific data outlined in the petition.  Public Citizen argued that such attempts fell far short of being sufficient to ensure the safety of patients that might consider using Stryker's medical device.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The Wingspan Stent is a class III medical device that comprises a stent with a balloon catheter and, until recently, was indicated for use "in improving cerebral artery lumen diameter in patients with intracranial atherosclerotic disease, refractory to medical therapy, in intracranial vessels with ≥ 50% stenosis [(a narrowing of the blood vessels that supply blood to the brain)] that are accessible to the system."  In simple terms, the device uses a self-expanding tube that is inserted into a blocked artery in the brain with the "goal of increasing blood flow and preventing strokes in patients who have experienced repeat strokes, even after taking medication to prevent blood clotting."&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/public-citizen-asks-fda-to-wit.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=2W6zbV3rksM:1j1t5S2b2jo:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=2W6zbV3rksM:1j1t5S2b2jo:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=2W6zbV3rksM:1j1t5S2b2jo:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=2W6zbV3rksM:1j1t5S2b2jo:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=2W6zbV3rksM:1j1t5S2b2jo:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/2W6zbV3rksM" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/2W6zbV3rksM/public-citizen-asks-fda-to-wit.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/public-citizen-asks-fda-to-wit.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Citizen Petitions</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Medical Devices</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2013 10:38:33 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/public-citizen-asks-fda-to-wit.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Rick Blumberg-FDA Attorney-Passes</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/01/FDA logo-thumb-300x225-thumb-300x225-10317-thumb-300x225-34939-thumb-300x225-37032-thumb-300x225-54520-thumb-300x225-56995.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for FDA logo.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/02/FDA logo-thumb-300x225-thumb-300x225-10317-thumb-300x225-34939-thumb-300x225-37032-thumb-300x225-54520-thumb-300x225-56995-thumb-300x225-58025.jpg" width="300" height="225" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;Eric "Rick" Blumberg, an attorney with FDA for over 40 years, passed away unexpectedly yesterday.  His noteworthy achievements include winning the &lt;a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=park+doctrine+fda+strict+liability&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,47&amp;case=4930311885230481814&amp;scilh=0"&gt;Park&lt;/a&gt; case, which reaffirmed the strict liability rule in FDA criminal proceedings, and implementing the doctrine of disgorgement in FDA enforcement actions.  A graduate of Washington &amp; Lee and Georgetown Law, he will truly be missed by the FDA bar.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/charlesraubicheck.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href="http://www.flhlaw.com/raubicheck"&gt;Charles J. Raubicheck&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=charles+raubicheck&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/rick-blumberg-fda-attorney-pas.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=GkRx9xfAvkA:IyZlLbZjLPA:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=GkRx9xfAvkA:IyZlLbZjLPA:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=GkRx9xfAvkA:IyZlLbZjLPA:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=GkRx9xfAvkA:IyZlLbZjLPA:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=GkRx9xfAvkA:IyZlLbZjLPA:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/GkRx9xfAvkA" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/GkRx9xfAvkA/rick-blumberg-fda-attorney-pas.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/rick-blumberg-fda-attorney-pas.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Organization</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2013 13:06:54 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/rick-blumberg-fda-attorney-pas.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Momenta Safe Harbor Cert Filed in Supreme Court</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/safe%20harbor.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="safe harbor.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/03/safe harbor-thumb-300x197-60631.jpg" width="300" height="200" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" itemprop="image"/&gt;&lt;/a&gt;The Supreme Court has another chance to clarify the scope of the safe-harbor provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1).  Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Sandoz Inc. &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/01240066.PDF"&gt;petitioned&lt;/a&gt; the Supreme Court to review &lt;a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=Momenta+Pharmaceuticals,+Inc.+v.+Amphastar+Pharmaceuticals,+Inc.,+686+F.3d+1348+(Fed.+Cir.+2012&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,47&amp;case=11608600530371685965&amp;scilh=0"&gt;Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, Inc.&lt;/a&gt;.  In that case, the Federal Circuit held that 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1) protected post-approval studies performed for FDA.  Momenta's request comes roughly one month after the Supreme Court declined to grant cert in &lt;a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?q=Classen+Immunotherapies,+Inc.+v.+Biogen+Idec,+659+F.3d+1057+(Fed.+Cir.+2011&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,47&amp;case=6862773344344663370&amp;scilh=0"&gt;Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen Idec&lt;/a&gt;, another Federal Circuit case involving the scope of 271(e)(1) (blogged on &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/01/safe-harbor-provision-case-not.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Momenta identifies the issue for the Supreme Court as:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;Whether the use of a patented invention in the course of post-approval manufacture of a drug for commercial sale, where the FDA requires that a record of that manufacturing activity be maintained, is exempt from liability for patent infringement under Section 271(e)(1) as "solely for uses reasonably related to the development and submission of information under a Federal law which regulations the manufacture, use, or sale of drugs.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/scotpittman.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href="http://www.flhlaw.com/pittman"&gt;Scot B. Pittman&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=scot+pittman&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;  

&lt;p&gt;The generic-drug company seeks Supreme Court intervention to remedy what it views as inconsistent and incorrect Federal Circuit law.  The safe harbor states that it is not an act of infringement to make, use, offer to sell, or sell a patented invention solely for uses reasonably related to the development and submission of information under [federal drug laws].  21 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1).  In Classen, a divided Federal Circuit panel interpreted the provision to be limited to "activities conducted to obtain pre-marketing approval of generic counterparts of patented inventions, before patent expiration."  Roughly one year later, another divided Federal Circuit panel, in Momenta, held that "the requirement to maintain records for FDA inspection satisfies the requirement that the uses be reasonably related to the development and submission of information to FDA.  &lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/momenta-safe-harbor-cert-filed.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=BA9nSNtv8s8:8dywckB6VkU:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=BA9nSNtv8s8:8dywckB6VkU:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=BA9nSNtv8s8:8dywckB6VkU:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=BA9nSNtv8s8:8dywckB6VkU:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=BA9nSNtv8s8:8dywckB6VkU:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/BA9nSNtv8s8" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/BA9nSNtv8s8/momenta-safe-harbor-cert-filed.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/momenta-safe-harbor-cert-filed.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Generics</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Human Drugs</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Litigation</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Thu, 07 Mar 2013 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/momenta-safe-harbor-cert-filed.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Medical Device Communication Draft Guidance Issued</title>
            <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/communicate.jpg"&gt;&lt;img alt="communicate.jpg" src="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/assets_c/2013/03/communicate-thumb-300x240-60633.jpg" width="300" height="240" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;On March 5, FDA issued a new draft guidance, "&lt;a href="http://www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/UCM341948.pdf"&gt;Types of Communication During the Review of Medical Device Submissions&lt;/a&gt;."  During the development of the various medical device user fee amendments ("MDUFA"), the discussion of improving communications between device applicants and FDA was suggested, described as an Interactive Review.  The collection of additional funds from MDUFA-related activities will enable FDA to improve the device review process and help meet certain performance goals incorporated into MDUFA.  Some of the suggested communications included Acceptance Review, Substantive Interactions, Interactive Review, and, where applicable, Missed MDUFA Goals.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The purpose of Acceptance Review communications are to: (1) identify the lead reviewer or Regulatory Project Manager assigned to the submission and (2) confirm acceptance of the submission or notify the submitter that the submission was not accepted based upon the review of objective acceptance criteria.  FDA aims to make these communications within 15 days of receipt of a 510(k), original premarket approval application ("PMA"), or a Panel-Track PMA Supplement, with such confirmation by fax, e-mail, or other written communication.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt;&lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/brianmalkin.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt;&lt;p class="authorname"&gt;Written by &lt;a href=" https://plus.google.com/u/0/108002378023153983071?rel=author"&gt;Brian J. Malkin&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=brian+malkin&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Substantive Interactions tell applicants that FDA either: (1) intends to continue working with the applicant to resolve any outstanding deficiencies (no hold), or (2) FDA has identified deficiencies sufficient to place the submission on hold.  Substantive Interactions should occur following acceptance of the submission and only after FDA has performed a complete review with targets of within 60 days of receipt of a complete 510(k) or within 90 days of the filing date of an original PMA, Panel-Track PMA Supplement, or 180-Day PMA Supplement.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/medical-device-communication-d.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=Tqay_FArcrk:vl2WBDPg_CM:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=Tqay_FArcrk:vl2WBDPg_CM:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=Tqay_FArcrk:vl2WBDPg_CM:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=Tqay_FArcrk:vl2WBDPg_CM:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=Tqay_FArcrk:vl2WBDPg_CM:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/Tqay_FArcrk" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/Tqay_FArcrk/medical-device-communication-d.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/medical-device-communication-d.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">510(k)</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Guidance</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Medical Devices</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2013 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/medical-device-communication-d.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
        <item>
            <title>FDA Budget Sequester Looms in Senate - Update</title>
            <description>&lt;div class="authorbox"&gt; &lt;img src="/images/profilephotos/rachaelmcclure.jpg" alt="Author's photo"/&gt; &lt;p class="authorname"&gt; Written by &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/rachel-mcclure.html"&gt;Rachael P. McClure&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?search=rachael+mcclure&amp;IncludeBlogs=408&amp;search="&gt;Other Posts By This Author&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt; &lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;With the $85 billion spending cuts now in effect, it is time for FDA and other agencies to adapt.  The 2013 impact will be condensed into the next seven months because the federal fiscal year ends on October 1.  While few details have been made available, FDA Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D. &lt;a href="http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2013/02/28/fda-commissioner-budget-cuts-mean-less-safe-food"&gt;said in an interview&lt;/a&gt;  on Thursday that she did not anticipate FDA having to furlough workers and emphasized that the majority of the effects would not be felt in the short term.  However, Hamburg estimated that the cuts will result in more than 2,000 fewer food safety inspections: "[C]learly we will be able to provide less of the oversight functions and we won't be able to broaden our reach to new facilities either, so inevitably that increases risk."  FDA may renew efforts to implement a user fee program for the food industry to offset this hit.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/rPMM5_h7NIg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
President Barack &lt;a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/03/01/press-conference-president-obama-talk-about-moving-forward-despite-sequester"&gt;Obama has vowed&lt;/a&gt; to continue to work with Congress to reach a compromise that would replace the cuts with a more balanced budget plan.  Meanwhile, the House Appropriations Committee &lt;a href="http://appropriations.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=321979"&gt;introduced a bill&lt;/a&gt; yesterday that would fund the government with $982 billion through the end of the fiscal year, assuming the sequester cuts would remain in effect.  While largely focused on the Department of Defense ($518 billion) and military construction and Veterans Affairs ($71.9 billion), the general provisions maintain the funding level of the &lt;a href="http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr2112rh/pdf/BILLS-112hr2112rh.pdf"&gt;Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2012&lt;/a&gt;.      The bill is scheduled to reach the House floor tomorrow.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/fda-budget-sequester-looms-in-1.html"&gt;Continue Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=3KBft7cHYY4:bJ4xSTiMBpY:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=3KBft7cHYY4:bJ4xSTiMBpY:7Q72WNTAKBA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKBA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=3KBft7cHYY4:bJ4xSTiMBpY:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?i=3KBft7cHYY4:bJ4xSTiMBpY:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://rss.justia.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?a=3KBft7cHYY4:bJ4xSTiMBpY:qj6IDK7rITs"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FdaLawyersBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rITs" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~4/3KBft7cHYY4" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
            <link>http://rss.justia.com/~r/FdaLawyersBlogCom/~3/3KBft7cHYY4/fda-budget-sequester-looms-in-1.html</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/fda-budget-sequester-looms-in-1.html</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Legislation</category>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">Organization</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2013 16:23:20 -0500</pubDate>
        <feedburner:origLink>http://www.fdalawyersblog.com/2013/03/fda-budget-sequester-looms-in-1.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
        
    </channel>
</rss>
