FTC changes premerger notification rules for drug patents

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

FTC changes premerger notification rules for drug patents

The FTC has issued final changes to the premerger notification rules governing how pharmaceutical companies must report the acquisition of exclusive patent rights to the FTC and the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ)

Under the Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) Act, drug companies must report certain mergers and acquisitions of assets, including patents and exclusive patent licences, over a certain amount to the FTC and DOJ. The current threshold is $70.9 million.

The change will revoke the existing “make, use and sell” standard governing which licences are reportable. Under the current rules, companies are only required to report transfers of patent licences if they allow the buyer to develop, manufacture and sell a product without restriction.

Under the new rules, pharmaceutical companies will have to report transfers falling under the scope of the more stringent “all commercially significant rights” test.

According to the FTC, this will mean that “an exclusive license is substantively the same as buying the patent or part of the patent outright, and carries the same potential anticompetitive effects".

The FTC claims the “make, use and sell” test is “no longer adequate” because some drugs companies were transferring most but not all of the rights under a licence in order to avoid the reporting requirement.

The FTC received four public comments on the rule, including an objection to it from industry organisation Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.

The new rules will take effect 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Lawyers at Lavoix provide an overview of the UPC’s approach to inventive step and whether the forum is promoting its own approach rather than following the EPO
Andrew Blattman, who helped IPH gain significant ground in Asia and Canada, will leave in the second half of 2026
The court ordering a complainant to rank its arguments in order of potential success and a win for Edwards Lifesciences were among the top developments in recent weeks
Frederick Lee has rejoined Boies Schiller Flexner, bolstering the firm’s capabilities across AI, media, and entertainment
Nirav Desai and Sasha S Rao at Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox explore how companies’ efforts to manage tariffs by altering corporate structures can undermine their ability to assert their patents and recover damages
Monika Żuraw, founder of Żuraw & Partners, discusses why IP should be part of the foundation of a business, and taking on projects that others walk away from
Lawyers say attention will turn to the UK government’s AI consultation after judgment fails to match pre-trial hype
Susan Keston and Rachel Fetches at HGF explain why the CoA’s decision to grant the UPC’s first permanent injunction demonstrates the court’s readiness to diverge from national court judgments
IP, M&A, life sciences and competition partners advised on deal that brings together brands such as ‘Huggies’ and ‘Kleenex’ with ‘Band-Aid’ and ‘Tylenol’
Stability AI, represented by Bird & Bird, is not liable for secondary copyright infringement, though Fieldfisher client Getty succeeds in some trademark claims
Gift this article