Contradicting rulings of the US patent office on double patenting jeopardize the generic and biosimilar drugs

Obviousness-type double patenting is allowed only in the US, but only if a terminal disclaimer and the same ownership are made for the expiry of the patent. Historically, this provision has hampered the entry of generic and biosimilar drugs due to the legal complexity and cost burden of resolving patent thickets accumulated by the originator companies. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) proposed a change in the ruling in March 2024 to avoid double patenting if the patent to which it is tied in terminal disclaimer has any claims that have been invalidated as anticipated or obvious. This rule change aimed to promote innovation and competition by deterring strategies that leverage multiple patents for obvious variants to obstruct competitors. However, after receiving 349 comments on the proposed rule change, the USPTO withdrew its plan in December 2024 despite most comments favoring it. In a contrary move, the USPTO secured a court ruling that the terminal disclaimers do not apply to extended patent expiry due to the failure of the USPTO to prosecute a patent on a timely basis. The double patenting must end to enable more affordable generic and biosimilar drugs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Pharmaceutical Patent Analyst
Published
2024-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/20468954.2025.2459582
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.13
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Contradicting rulings of the US patent office on double patenting jeopardize the generic and biosimilar drugs

Sarfaraz K. Niazi
1 citations
Pharmaceutical Patent Analyst
Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy
1.13
article

Contradicting rulings of the US patent office on double patenting jeopardize the generic and biosimilar drugs

Sarfaraz K. Niazi
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Obviousness-type double patenting is allowed only in the US, but only if a terminal disclaimer and the same ownership are made for the expiry of the patent. Historically, this provision has hampered the entry of generic and biosimilar drugs due to the legal complexity and cost burden of resolving patent thickets accumulated by the originator companies. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) proposed a change in the ruling in March 2024 to avoid double patenting if the patent to which it is tied in terminal disclaimer has any claims that have been invalidated as anticipated or obvious. This rule change aimed to promote innovation and competition by deterring strategies that leverage multiple patents for obvious variants to obstruct competitors. However, after receiving 349 comments on the proposed rule change, the USPTO withdrew its plan in December 2024 despite most comments favoring it. In a contrary move, the USPTO secured a court ruling that the terminal disclaimers do not apply to extended patent expiry due to the failure of the USPTO to prosecute a patent on a timely basis. The double patenting must end to enable more affordable generic and biosimilar drugs.

Pharmaceutical Patent AnalystVol. 13(4-6)
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US), University of Illinois System (US), University of Illinois Chicago (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy
1.13
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.