Hikma v. Amarin: Breaking Down the Supreme Court Argument on Skinny Labels and Induced Infringement

Daryl Wiesen, Jaime Santos, and Willy Jay hosted a webinar on April 30 following the Supreme Court’s April 29 oral argument in Hikma v. Amarin. The case addresses induced-infringement claims involving off-patent generic drugs that are marketed using a “skinny label” — a label that “carves out” any indication covered by a patented method of use and includes only unpatented indications. This skinny-label pathway to generic launch was enacted by Congress so that when a drug product is no longer covered by a patent, one patented use will not foreclose marketing a generic drug for other unpatented ones. At oral argument, the Supreme Court considered when (if ever) a generic manufacturer can be held liable for induced infringement when launching with a skinny label. Goodwin’s subject-matter experts and Supreme Court litigators discussed the argument and what the case may mean for induced infringement, generic drug labeling strategies, and pharmaceutical patent litigation.