About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.
2018 Juristant Badge - MBHB_165
Juristat #4 Overall Rank

E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Contact the Docs


  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.
Juristat #8 Overall Rank


« USPTO News Briefs | Main | Court Report Supplement »

October 31, 2012



Like the prior petition to exert "march-in-rights" on Norvir, this petition should be denied as well. As correctly noted by the NIH in denying the prior petition, "drug pricing has global implications" (including the fact that the rest of the world such as Europe exerts, in my opinion, artificial government control on drug pricing) that should be addressed by Congress specifically. Granting "march-in-rights" petitions this circumstance would make Bayh-Dole "dead letter."

I do not see how Bayh-Dole would be a dead letter if a provision specifically in the law is actually followed.

Kevin, is there an update here? I believe that the NIH was supposed to make a decision by December 25, 2012, correct? If not, when can we expect a decision? Thanks.

The comments to this entry are closed.

May 2024

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31