InvestorsHub Logo

Number sleven

09/24/21 2:42 PM

#355511 RE: sts66 #355506

Sts, You are partially correct. Regulatory exclusivity and patent validity are separate issues. Hikma can't submit an ANDA for the R-IT indication at this time. They can make the argument that the current label is not infringing on the R-IT patents because those patents are invalid.
Sleven,

dukesking

09/24/21 3:50 PM

#355518 RE: sts66 #355506

Thanks for the input. My wording was confusing. I was referring to the date that ANDA filers can start the process and challenge REDUCE-IT patents which is Dec 13, 2022. I appreciate the reminder that an AMRN infringement suit would follow any ANDA filing and start a 30 month stay. Seems like that would take us to around 2026 before an initial ruling. I was asking, since AMRN is suing Hikma and claiming infringement of CVD patents if Hikma could make the claim now that the infringement suit is unfounded because prior art makes CVD patents invalid for obviousness. The normal timeline for a generic ANDA filing will overlap the current infringement suit. Can the courts join these cases if asked. Excuse my ignorance in court proceedings. Either way, I don’t think it changes the 2026 timeline.

hipfreejazz

09/27/21 3:08 PM

#355676 RE: sts66 #355506

STS, from Amarin's 10-Q, p. 53:

In addition to the ANDA patent litigation described above, we could face patent litigation related to the patents filed in the Orange Book related to the REDUCE-IT study. A three-year period of exclusivity under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments is generally granted for a drug product that contains an active moiety that has been previously approved, such as when the application contains reports of new clinical investigations (other than bioavailability studies) conducted by the sponsor that were essential to approval of the application. Accordingly, we received three-year exclusivity in connection with the approval of our sNDA for REDUCE-IT study results. Such three-year exclusivity protection precludes, unless otherwise agreed, the U.S. FDA from approving a marketing application for an ANDA, a product candidate that the U.S. FDA views as having the same conditions of approval as VASCEPA (for example, the same indication and/or other conditions of use), or a 505(b)(2) NDA submitted to the U.S. FDA with VASCEPA as the reference product until December 13, 2022, three years from the date of U.S. FDA approval of the REDUCE-IT sNDA. While this three-year exclusivity would generally prevent such an approval based on our REDUCE-IT indication during such time, it does not preclude tentative or final approval of an ANDA based on our MARINE indication. The U.S. FDA may accept and commence review of such REDUCE-IT-related applications during the three-year exclusivity period. Such three-year exclusivity grant does not prevent a company from challenging the validity of REDUCE-IT patents during such period. This three-year form of exclusivity may also not prevent the U.S. FDA from approving an NDA that relies only on its own data to support the change or innovation. Regulatory exclusivity is in addition to exclusivity afforded by issued patents related to VASCEPA.

We may also face challenges to the validity of our patents through a procedure known as inter partes review. Inter partes review is a trial proceeding conducted through the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Such a proceeding could be introduced against us within the statutory one-year window triggered by service of a complaint for infringement related to an ANDA filing or at any time by an entity not served with a complaint. Such proceedings may review the patentability of one or more claims in a patent on specified substantive grounds such as allegations that a claim is obvious on the basis of certain prior art.


https://investor.amarincorp.com/node/21161/html