To amend title 35, United States Code, to address the infringement of patents that claim biological products, and for other purposes.
Summary
What This Bill Does
This bill amends title 35 section 271(e) for biologic patent litigation. For biosimilar submissions, the act of infringement extends to patents that claim the biological product, a method of using the product, or a method or product used to manufacture it. At the same time, if a reference-product sponsor sues a biosimilar applicant under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act pathway, the sponsor may generally assert no more than 20 qualifying patents, and no more than 10 of those may have issued after the statutory supplemental-list date.
The cap applies to patents claiming the biosimilar product, its use, or manufacturing methods or products; listed under the Public Health Service Act patent exchange; and either filed more than four years after reference-product approval or claiming a manufacturing process not used by the sponsor. Courts may raise the cap if the request is timely and justice or good cause requires it, including when the biosimilar applicant fails to provide required information, materially changes the biological product or process, or patent office delay affected issuance. The cap applies only if the biosimilar applicant completes specified patent-dance steps and does not apply to therapy, diagnosis, prophylaxis, indication, method-of-treatment, or other condition-of-use patents.
Who Benefits and How
Biosimilar applicants benefit from a presumptive cap on the number of late-issued or unused-process patents a reference-product sponsor can assert. Patients using biologics may benefit if patent-thicket limits speed biosimilar competition. Health plan payers benefit if biosimilar entry reduces biologic drug spending. Federal courts benefit from statutory criteria for increasing the patent cap. Biologics patent litigators benefit from clearer categories of patents inside and outside the cap.
Who Bears the Burden and How
Reference product sponsors lose some ability to assert large numbers of qualifying biologic patents in a single biosimilar infringement action. Biosimilar applicants must complete specified patent-dance steps to receive the cap. Federal district courts must decide good-cause requests and evaluate information gaps, material changes, and patent office delays. Patent portfolio managers must sort patents by filing date, manufacturing use, supplemental-list timing, and treatment-method exclusions.
Key Provisions
- Expands biologic infringement coverage to biological-product, use, and manufacturing patents tied to biosimilar submissions.
- Limits reference-product sponsors to 20 qualifying patents in covered biosimilar litigation.
- Limits late-issued patents within that group to 10.
- Allows courts to increase the cap for justice or good cause.
- Excludes treatment, diagnosis, prophylaxis, indication, and other condition-of-use patents from the cap.
Evidence Chain:
This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers with clause-level evidence links.
At a Glance
What This Bill Does
Changes biologic patent litigation rules by extending infringement to patents claiming the biological product, use, or manufacturing method, while limiting reference-product sponsors in biosimilar litigation to 20 qualifying patents, no more than 10 issued after the supplemental list date, with court authority to raise the cap for justice or good cause and exclusions for treatment-method patents.
Key Policy Areas
Biologics, Patents, Biosimilars, Pharmaceuticals
Primary Purpose
Changes biologic patent litigation rules by extending infringement to patents claiming the biological product, use, or manufacturing method, while limiting reference-product sponsors in biosimilar litigation to 20 qualifying patents, no more than 10 issued after the supplemental list date, with court authority to raise the cap for justice or good cause and exclusions for treatment-method patents.
Policy Domains
House resolution provisions
Identified Gains
- Biosimilar applicants
- Patients using biologics
- Health plan payers
- Federal courts
- Biologics patent litigators
Identified Costs
- Reference product sponsors
- Biosimilar applicants
- Federal district courts
- Patent portfolio managers
Sponsors
Legislative Progress
ReportedReported by Mr. Grassley, with amendments
Mr. Cornyn (for himself, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. …
Stakeholder Effects
cui bono?How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.
Biosimilar applicants, Patent portfolio managers, Reference product sponsors
Positive-direction: Biosimilar applicants
Negative-direction: Patent portfolio managers, Reference product sponsors
Bill Structure & Actor Mappings
Who is "The Secretary" in each section?
- "courts"
- → Federal district courts
We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.
Learn more about our methodology