Actually, the trial date is set for Oct. 30, 2023.
But that doesn't matter. I doubt Amarin wants to race to trial with this. Holding the hammer over the head of the generics and insurance companies is enough to force them to better behave rather than steamroll the pharmaceutical company, in this case Amarin, like they usually do.
This litigation already has caused some insurers to take steps to ensure the generics cannot carve into the market covered by Amarin's patents. And this magistrate judge has suggested in this opinion that tactics Health Net took might be viewed as encouraging infringement, even though Health Net argues it is business as usual in the pharmaceutical market. The judge's words has to scare insurance companies because it's not worth it for them to help the generics infringe.
She wrote: "Some of Health Net’s formularies currently list Hikma’s generic version as a Tier 1 drug and Vascepa as a Tier 3 drug. The result is that plan beneficiaries have to pay a higher copay for Vascepa than they do for Hikma’s generic version. ... According to the First Amended Complaint, Health Net’s implementation of its prior authorization process for icosapent ethyl prescriptions, combined with its placement of Hikma’s generic on the formulary as a tier 1 drug and Vascepa as a tier 3 drug, amounts to encouragement to providers and patients to administer Hikma’s product for the unapproved CV indication, which, Plaintiffs allege, results in infringement of the asserted patents.
To my knowledge, this is a novel theory. Neither side has cited any case in which a health insurer has been found liable to a pharmaceutical company for inducing infringement of a drug method of use patent. Viewing the allegations in the light most favorable to Plaintiffs, and in the absence of precedent to the contrary, I cannot say at this stage that Plaintiffs’ theory is so implausible as to require dismissal at the pleadings stage."
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
