US Supreme Court declines to hear patent dispute over Bausch blockbuster diarrhea drug
Lower court found Norwich generic infringes Salix patents
Alvogen has Xifaxan generic deals with Teva, Sun, Sandoz
By Blake Brittain
WASHINGTON, Nov 18 (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court turned away on Monday a bid by Alvogen's subsidiary Norwich Pharmaceuticals to sell a generic version of Canada-based Bausch Health's BHC.TO blockbuster diarrhea drug Xifaxan.
The justices declined to hear an appeal by Norwich Pharmaceuticals of a lower court's ruling that its proposed generic would infringe patents owned by Bausch unit Salix Pharmaceuticals for using Xifaxan to treat the liver-related brain disorder hepatic encephalopathy. In doing so, the justices let the lower court's ruling stand.
Xifaxan has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to treat traveler's diarrhea and irritable bowel syndrome and can also be used to prevent hepatic encephalopathy. Bausch earned more than $1.8 billion from Xifaxan sales in 2023, according to a company filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Bausch has separately agreed to allow Xifaxan generics from Teva Pharmaceuticals TEVA.TA, Sun Pharmaceuticals SUN.NS and Sandoz SDZ.S starting in 2028 after settling related patent disputes.
Salix in 2020 sued New York state-based Norwich over its proposed generic of Xifaxan. A Delaware federal judge decided in 2022 that the generic would infringe three Salix patents related to treating hepatic encephalopathy while declaring other Salix patents invalid.
Norwich asked the patent-focused U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to reverse the judge's decision to block its generic. The Federal Circuit affirmed the decision in April.
Norwich in a filing told the Supreme Court that the patents did not cover Xifaxan uses for which Norwich had sought FDA approval.
"The cost of the delay in generic alternatives will be borne by patients and the healthcare system that will pay monopoly prices" for treatments that are "either not covered by a valid patent or that are covered by patents that would have been proven invalid or not infringed by a generic alternative," Norwich said in the filing.
Bausch did not respond to Norwich's Supreme Court petition.
Reporting by Blake Brittain in Washington; Editing by Will Dunham
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
