Publication:

The ANDA Patent Certification Requirement and Thirty-Month Stay Provision: Is it Necessary?

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

2001

Published Version

Published Version

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

The ANDA Patent Certification Requirement and Thirty-Month Stay Provision: Is it Necessary? (2001 Third Year Paper)

Abstract

Patent law and the Federal drug approval laws are both rather arcane and complex. The intersection of these two areas in the Hatch-Waxman Act is particularly complicated, and this perhaps explains the failure of the Act to consistently comply with core philosophical principles for supporting the modern intellectual property regime. The following paper addresses the problems arising from the thirty-month stay provision of the Hatch-Waxman Act, evaluates the legitimacy of the provision under accepted philosophical justifications for intellectual property, and suggests possible alternatives for addressing the failures of this provision.

Description

Other Available Sources

Research Data

Keywords

Food and Drug Law, ANDA, thirty-month stay, hatch-waxman, FDA, drug approval

Terms of Use

This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material (LAA), as set forth at Terms of Service

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Related Stories