Biosimilars pathway safe after US Supreme Court upholds Obama healthcare

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Cookies Settings

Biosimilars pathway safe after US Supreme Court upholds Obama healthcare

The US Supreme Court has upheld so-called Obamacare, ensuring that the pathway for biosimilars included with the law will remain intact

The nation’s highest court today ruled critical parts of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) constitutional, and with it the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) giving the FDA authority to approve biosimilars.

Had the PPACA been stricken in part or in its entirety, it would have presented obstacles to the BPCIA surviving in its present form. In particular, the US government has been critical of the 12-year data exclusivity period for innovators, calling for it to be shortened to seven years.

“We’ve avoided a protracted fight over new legislation in this area,” said Gerald Flattmann of Paul Hastings. “There could have been a multiyear delay in biosimilar approval.”

This was the best case scenario for the biologics industry, which feared that even had the BPCIA stayed intact while other provisions were deemed unconstitutional, it would have been difficult for it to have survived.

Still in question, however, is what the regulatory framework will ultimately look like.

“The FDA has provided very few tangibles or nuts and bolts considering what the approval process is going to look like and whether it will be much less onerous than the approval process already in place for innovator biologics,” Flattmann said.

But, he added: “We’re in better shape than we would have been had this portion of the law been stricken.”

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

As clients demand more flexible fees and AI-driven efficiencies, IP firms are rethinking pricing without abandoning the value of their work
HG Law was formed largely by ex Fish & Neave lawyers who left after the latter's merger with Ropes & Gray; now those experiences are shaping its latest combination
David Rodrigues and Evan Lazerowitz – attorneys at Robinson & Cole – offer practical guidance on the steps a business might consider to preserve and maximise IP value before entering financial distress or insolvency
Daniel Law CEO Alicia Daniel-Shores may have stepped into a family business, but she has spent two decades building her own vision around technology and litigation
Law firms don't particularly like saying no to clients. Perhaps they should get better at it
The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
The IP boutique is betting that growing investment in quantum and semiconductors will fuel demand as technology shifts toward physical systems
Lawyers say the overhaul better reflects commercial reality, with changes spanning novelty searches, digital designs and access to a small claims track, but stopping short of criminalising unregistered design infringement
Carpmaels & Ransford hires its fourth partner of the year and wins access to UPC files, as fresh orders address costs, confidentiality and the use of divisional patents
Peter Ling of Lenz & Staehelin in Zurich discusses trends in patent litigation, the regulation of AI and the benefits of teaching IP
Gift this article