This draft below will soon be integrated with the earlier Schering-Plough "in substance" patent cliff table -- to set forth the "New Merck" in-substance patent cliff picture -- in one plain-English, and convenient summary table. Let me know if any of you see any errors in the work thus far ("Old" Merck, only here):
| Brand Name | 2008 Sales | Chemical Name | Claim First Filed | 30 Month Expiry/ At-Risk Date | Likely Competitor |
| Singulair® | $4.3B | montelukast | February 2007 | August 22, 2009a | Teva |
| Primaxin® | $760M | imipenem/cilastatin | January 2007 | September 1, 2009b | Ranbaxy Labs |
| Cozaar® | $3.5B | losartan | N/A | February 11, 2010c | Multiple |
| Emend® | $264M | aprepitant | January 2009 | June 2011 | Sandoz |
| Nexium® | $1.4B | esomeprazole | October 2005 | May 27, 2014d | Ranbaxy |
| Fosamax® | $1.5B | alendronate | . | Lost exclusivity in 2008 | numerous |
| Trusopt/Cosopt® | $780M | dorzolamide | . | Lost exclusivity in 2008 | numerous |
| Proscar® | $320M | finasteride | . | Lost exclusivity in 2006 | numerous |
| Zocor® | $660M | statin family | Lost exclusivity in 2006 | numerous | |
| TOTAL: | $13.4 Billion |
~~~~~~~~~~
Note a: Trial completed February 2009; awaiting decision; no launch yet, despite window being open since August 22, 2009.Note b: By agreement, Ranbaxy may launch September 1, 2009.
Note c: First Cozaar patents expire in February and April 2010. Many likely competitors after those dates.
Note d: Despite the in-substance launch window opening in April of 2008, Raxaby and Merck (along with partner AstraZeneca) entered a settlement agreement keeping a generic form of Nexium off the market until May of 2014. The United States Federal Trade Commission (the "FTC") is now formally investigating this settlement agreement -- looking into, among other matters, its potential for improper anticompetitive effects. In that regard, Merck and AstraZeneca each received an investigative document demand from the FTC -- in July 2008 -- regarding the settlement agreement with Ranbaxy. Merck is cooperating with the FTC in responding to the document demand.
More to come, as ever.
and then there's this: http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/09/nj_supreme_court_upholds_45m_a.html
ReplyDeleteN.J. Supreme Court upholds $4.5M award for widow of Vioxx victim
By The Associated Press
September 29, 2009, 1:34PM
TRENTON -- The Supreme Court of New Jersey backed a $4.5 million award to the widow of a man who suffered heart problems after using Merck's painkiller Vioxx.
Yep.
ReplyDeleteThe Vioxx liability may ultimately double in size, from the $4.5 billion now set aside for the class settlement. How so?
Well, as various plaintiffs "opt out" of the global settlement, and choose individual routes through the legal maze -- in each state, the number will undoubtedly grow. By how much?
No one really knows.
That "opt out", though, is a right each plaintiff will retain, at least until he or she finally "opts into" the class settlement.
Thanks -- do stop back!
Namaste