Skip to main content
HOUSE 2873117th CongressOrdered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by the Yeas and Nays: 27 - 16.

Affordable Prescriptions for Patients Through Promoting Competition Act of 2021

Last Action
9/29/2021

Actions

  • 2021-09-29Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by the Yeas and Nays: 27 - 16.
  • 2021-09-29Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
  • 2021-04-28Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
  • 2021-04-28Introduced in House
  • 2021-04-28Introduced in House

CRS Summary

As of 2021-04-28 (00)

Affordable Prescriptions for Patients Through Promoting Competition Act of 2021

This bill prohibits product hopping by drug manufacturers and authorizes the Federal Trade Commission to sue in court or institute administrative proceedings to enforce this prohibition.

Generally, product-hopping describes a situation where, when the patents on a reference drug (or biological product) expire, the manufacturer switches to a follow-on product that is covered by a later-expiring patent. Under this bill, a follow-on product is a changed, modified, or reformulated version of the reference drug that shares an indication (what the drug is used for) with the reference drug.

The bill presumes product hopping has occurred when a reference drug manufacturer engages in a hard switch or a soft switch. A hard switch occurs when, after receiving notice of an application for Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval to market a generic (or biosimilar) version of the reference drug, the manufacturer markets a follow-on product and (1) the FDA withdraws approval of the reference drug at the manufacturer's request, or (2) the manufacturer announces the withdrawal or discontinuance of the reference drug or destroys the drug's inventory in a manner that impedes generic competitors.

Furthermore, the bill presumes that a soft switch occurred if a reference drug manufacturer (1) markets a follow-on product, and (2) takes actions that disadvantage the reference drug relative to that follow-on product in a way that impedes competition from a generic drug.

A drug manufacturer may rebut these presumptions by demonstrating that its conduct was not intended to limit competition.

Cosponsors (5)

  • JERROLD NADLER (D-NY)
  • Ken Buck (R-CO)
  • CAROLYN MALONEY (D-NY)
  • ELEANOR NORTON (D-DC)
  • Val Demings (D-FL)

Subjects

  • Administrative remedies
  • Civil actions and liability
  • Competition and antitrust
  • Consumer affairs
  • Drug safety, medical device, and laboratory regulation
  • Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
  • Health care costs and insurance
  • Inflation and prices
  • Intellectual property
  • Judicial review and appeals
  • Manufacturing
  • Prescription drugs
Read on Congress.gov

Sourced from Congress.gov (public domain).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.