That's interesting that he thinks it could be worse than the original ruling. I've read the opposite from other legal minds, but good to hear his take!
Lassman should have just said ‘It’s going to make it more difficult for companies to steal patented scripts on protected indications and stay in their allowable indication’. It shouldn’t be hard at all. All generics have to do is behave with labeling and marketing and send disclaimer letters to all that market or resell their generic product stating they must strictly use it for, and authorize coverage for, non carve out uses only’. They could also provide strict PA requirements that must be met to ensure there’s no crossover use. Or other language like it. I believe that would shift all the liability to the payers. Payers aren’t stupid and could fix this problem if they wanted too. Payers appear to already be aware of the liability issues and some have recently made some adjustments to that end. More work is needed and AMRN v Health Net may be just what’s needed to get it done. IMO.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
