直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Supplements to Biologics License Application Do Not Trigger New Notice Obligation under Section 262(l)(8)(A)

July 8, 2020

Authored and Edited by Michelle G. Rice; Caitlin E. Fowler; Elizabeth D. Ferrill

In Genentech, Inc. v. Immunex R.I. Corp., No. 2019-2155 (Fed. Cir. July 6, 2020), the Federal Circuit held that supplements to an FDA approved biologics license application do not trigger obligations to provide new marketing notices under 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(8)(A). Under 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(8)(A), biosimilar applicants must notify a reference product sponsor at least 180 days before commercially marketing a “biological product.”

In September 2017, Amgen obtained FDA approval to market Mvasi, a biosimilar version of Genentech’s cancer treatment drug Avastin. In October 2017, Amgen notified Genentech that it intended to commercially market Mvasi. Amgen subsequently filed supplements to its application. In July 2019, Amgen decided to commercially launch Mvasi. Genentech filed two emergency motions in the district court seeking to preclude Amgen from marketing Mvasi, until Amgen provided the requisite notice under 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(8)(A). The district court denied both motions.

 On appeal, Genentech argued that Amgen’s third supplement, which added a manufacturing facility for Mvasi, and Amgen’s fourth supplement, which amended the Mvasi label, created distinct “biological product[s],” thus triggering new notice obligations. The Federal Circuit disagreed, explaining that despite Amgen’s later supplements to its application, the “biological product,” Mvasi, did not change. The Court rejected Genentech’s interpretation of 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(8)(A), noting that the statute “contains a single timing requirement” and a biosimilar applicant “need not provide another notice for each supplemental application” concerning the same product. Accordingly, the Court held that Amgen’s 2017 letter satisfied the notice obligations under Section 262(l)(8)(A) and affirmed the district court’s denial of Genentech’s motions.

Tags

Food and Drug Administration (FDA), FDA Guidance

Related Practices

Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials

Branded Hatch-Waxman (ANDA) Litigation and Trials

Related Industries

Life Sciences

Biologics

Related Offices

Washington, DC

Contacts

Michelle_Yongyuan_Rice
Michelle G. Rice
Associate
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4229
Email
Elizabeth D. Ferrill
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4445
Email

Copyright © 2020 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. 


DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.

Related Insights

Hybrid Conference

Intellectual Property Law Institute 2026 – New York

September 28-29, 2026

New York

Conference

13th Annual Summit for Women Leaders in Life Sciences Law

July 29-30, 2026

Boston

Conference

7th International Conference on Biofuels and Bioenergy

June 25-26, 2026

Edinburgh

Prosecution First Blog

USPTO Tightens “Unintentional Delay” Petitions — 1-Year Time Period Now Triggers Heightened Scrutiny

June 23, 2026

Lecture

Munich Licensing Summer Course 2026

June 18-19, 2026

Munich

At the PTAB Blog

New Informative Decision Applies the USPTO’s U.S. Manufacturing and Small Business Use of AIA Proceedings Memo

June 18, 2026

Lecture

Latest Developments in U.S. Section 337 Investigations and Response Strategies

June 12, 2026

Dongguan

European IP Blog

UPC Central Division Revokes Patent Covering Covid-19 Treatment Remdesivir

8 June 2026

Conference

17th Summit on Biosimilars & Innovator Biologics

June 2-3, 2026

New York

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP