Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorPohl, Mark-
dc.identifier.issn0975-1076 (Online); 0971-7544 (Print)-
dc.description.abstractCourts are in general designed to adjudicate past events (e.g., crimes and torts which have already occurred). Thus, for example, proving patent infringement merely requires showing the court the on-market product, and comparing it to the patent at issue. United States law, however, provides for a fundamentally-different kind of infringement: potential future infringement by a future generic pharmaceutical product which does not yet exist because it has not yet been approved for marketing. This type of infringement requires US courts to adjudicate future events, predicting the likely characteristics of the future generic pharmaceutical. In requiring a court to adjudicate a potential future event, this type of infringement can pose a unique evidentiary challenge to judges. This article discusses how US judges evaluate potential future infringement by generic pharmaceuticals in case of a ‘Paragraph (iv)’ challenge of the Orange Book listed patents or a potential challenge to the patents envisaged on the Paragraph (iv) declaration. en_US
dc.publisherNISCAIR-CSIR, Indiaen_US
dc.rights CC Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Indiaen_US
dc.sourceJIPR Vol.19(3) [May 2014]en_US
dc.subjectGeneric drugen_US
dc.subjectGeneric pharmaceuticalen_US
dc.subjectAbbreviated New Drug Applicationen_US
dc.subjectPatent infringementen_US
dc.subjectArtificial infringementen_US
dc.subjectPharmaceutical patent infringementen_US
dc.titlePatent Infringement by ANDA Filingen_US
Appears in Collections:JIPR Vol.19(3) [May 2014]

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
JIPR 19(3) 218-222.pdf66.17 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in NOPR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.