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

Boehringer Ingelheim has instructed a team from Kirkland, while Teva is being represented by Pinsent Masons
The Delhi High Court’s latest directions offer an opportunity to move beyond remedies against bad-faith registrations and address how suspicious applications are identified in the first place, says Fatima Baig at Lexlinc
Camilla Hamrin describes how the acquisition by Acapo Onsagers will impact Bergenstråhle’s trademark practice – and reflects on changes she has seen over 30 years in IP
On a recent trip to the French capital, we learned that the UPC is squeezing domestic litigation while firms are chasing senior talent, experimenting with AI and considering new ways of organising their practices
Daniel Law says a string of lateral hires and broader expansion plans will strengthen its position to capitalise on Brazil’s burgeoning IP and patent litigation market
Jason Raeburn’s arrival will expand the firm’s London footprint in AI, copyright and tech disputes
The firm is shaping its AI strategy around partnerships with Harvey and Legora alongside internally developed tools from its legal technology company, Eltemate
A dispute Down Under shows why trademark lawyers cannot afford to wait on the sidelines when a rival brand gathers momentum
The Third Circuit’s decision in Thomson Reuters v ROSS marks the first appellate-level decision addressing AI and fair use, prompting copyright counsel to consider arguments around potential licensing markets
Injunctions for HandsFree Labs and Align Technology come as the Court of Appeal warns that busy teams must have the staffing and resources to meet UPC deadlines
Gift this article