Line design
ANDA must be “received” by FDA for district court litigation to proceed.
GENERICally Speaking: A Hatch Waxman Litigation Bulletin

Case Name: Amarin Pharma, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc., Civil Action No. 14-2250 (MLC), 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7555 (D.N.J. Jan 22, 2016) (Cooper, J.)

Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Vascepa® (icosapent ethyl); U.S. Patents Nos. 8,293,728 (“the ’728 patent”), 8,318,715 (“the ’715 patent”), 8,357,677 (“the ’677 patent”), 8,367,652 (“the ’652 patent”), 8,377,920 (“the ’920 patent”), 8,399,446 (“the ’446 patent”), 8,415,335 (“the ’335 patent”), 8,426,399 (“the ’399 patent”), 8,431,560 (“the ’560 patent”), 8,440,650 (“the ’650 patent”), 8,501,225 (“the ’225 patent”), 8,518,929 (“the ’929 patent”), 8,524,698 (“the ’698 patent”), 8,546,372 (“the ’372 patent”), 8,551,521 (“the ’521 patent”), and 8,617,594 (“the ’594 patent”)

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: Amarin owns various patents that cover Vascepa, which is used to reduce triglyceride levels in adults. Amarin brought suit against the Defendants asserting that the Defendants infringed those patents by seeking approval to sell generic Vascepa. The Defendants moved to dismiss the claims against them for a lack of case or controversy because the FDA had not deemed any of the related ANDAs to be “received.” The court agreed and dismissed the case.

Why Defendants Prevailed:  The FDA originally issued a determination providing for a three-year exclusivity period for Vascepa, and then accepted ANDAs from the Defendants. Subsequently, the District Court for the District of Columbia vacated the determination and remanded to the FDA. On remand, the FDA ruled that a five year exclusivity period was more appropriate, and advised the Defendants that it considered their ANDAs submitted, but not yet “received.”

The Court granted the Defendants’ motion to dismiss based on the fact that the ANDAs were not deemed “received” by the FDA. Indeed, the court ruled that the ANDA litigation process cannot even begin until the corresponding ANDA is “received” by the FDA, not merely delivered or submitted to the FDA. Thus, the court was required to dismiss the case because it lacked the authority to adjudicate the matter.

Related Services

Jump to Page

Robins Kaplan LLP Cookie Preference Center

Your Privacy

When you visit our website, we use cookies on your browser to collect information. The information collected might relate to you, your preferences, or your device, and is mostly used to make the site work as you expect it to and to provide a more personalized web experience. For more information about how we use Cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Always Active

Necessary cookies enable core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility. These cookies may only be disabled by changing your browser settings, but this may affect how the website functions.

Functional Cookies

Always Active

Some functions of the site require remembering user choices, for example your cookie preference, or keyword search highlighting. These do not store any personal information.

Form Submissions

Always Active

When submitting your data, for example on a contact form or event registration, a cookie might be used to monitor the state of your submission across pages.

Performance Cookies

Performance cookies help us improve our website by collecting and reporting information on its usage. We access and process information from these cookies at an aggregate level.

Powered by Firmseek