Publication: The ANDA Patent Certification Requirement and Thirty-Month Stay Provision: Is it Necessary?
Loading...
Open/View Files
Date
2001
Authors
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.
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