References
-
Blomberg announcement of the decision: first report
-
Amicus Brief by Frederick Abbott supporting the SCOTUS decision, specifically mentioning the import of pharmaceutical products as a purpose: Frederick Abbott is Edward Ball Eminent Scholar and Professor of International Law at Florida State University College of Law.
-
Post-decision analysis by Frederick Abbott on consequences on parallel imports of drugs: “Further US legislation may not be required before parallel importers begin bringing patented medicines into the United States if such medicines are produced in FDA-inspected and approved facilities abroad, the medicines have been approved for sale in the United States and chain of custody records are satisfactory.”
-
Interview with Professor Abbott on FUDiabetes discussing specific consequences of decision on insulin imports into the US
-
Blomberg BNA (for pay outlet) has an outstanding analysis of likely consequences of the ruling, including for drug manufacturers and the re-import of drugs into the US
-
Thomas Cotter’s Analysis of the ruling: he is Briggs and Morgan Professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, and had filed an amicus brief requesting that SCOTUS affirm the Federal Circuit decision.
-
Daniel Hemel and Lisa Ouellette’s first thoughts on how the ruling may be skirted: these suggestions are for tech companies and would not apply to pharma products.
-
IPWatchDog’s analysis of the grounds of the reversal by SCOTUS: reviews the exact reasoning for the decision, but does not discuss consequences on drug market
-
WorldIPReview Analysis of decision: review of the case history, no discussion of drug implications
-
SCOTUSblog analysis – in-depth for patent issues, but not coverage of medicinal drugs
-
First NYT analysis: misses drug import implication
-
Brian Fung’s review at the Washington Post – deep on patent but again missing medicinal drug issue
-
First Fortune analysis: misses drug import implication
-
First Reuters report: no discussion of drug import
-
The Hill analysis: also misses drug impact
-
First Washington post report: it’s a Blomberg cut-and-paste, no analysis
-
Gizmodo analysis: the ONLY outlet that picked up on the drug angle!
Thanks to Rachel Sachs (@RESachs on Twitter), Associate Professor of Law at Washington University in St Louis, for tweeting about it: https://twitter.com/RESachs/status/869564400063176704
The discussion thread for this post is here.
This article will continue to be updated throughout the day, as news develop.
Last update: 6/1/2017 at 1:10 AM PST