Order Summary 0 Item (s)
-
Subtotal ( items)
-Tax info
-Total Savings
- -
Order Total
-
You've added 10 webinars! At this quantity, you may qualify for exclusive discounts and additional benefits through our Enterprise offerings.
You can continue your purchase online, or contact our sales team to explore customized pricing and solutions for your team.
- videocam Live Webinar with Live Q&A
- calendar_month June 29, 2026 @ 1:00 PM ET/10:00 AM PT
- signal_cellular_alt Intermediate
- card_travel Patent
- schedule 90 minutes
Induced Infringement in Pharma Litigation: Supreme Court Decision in Hikma v. Amarin, Guidance for Using Skinny Labels
Welcome to BARBRI, the trusted global leader in legal education. Continue to access the same expert-led Strafford CLE and CPE webinars you know and value. Plus, explore professional skills courses and more.
About the Course
Introduction
This CLE course will guide patent counsel on issues of inducement in pharmaceutical patent litigation following the Supreme Court's decision in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma. The panel will discuss strategies regarding claim and label language for both brand and generic drug makers.
Description
On June 4, 2026, in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma Inc., the Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit, finding brand drug manufacturer Amarin failed to state a claim for active inducement by the generic drug maker Hikma under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). The unanimous decision gives generic drug manufacturers some protection from liability for induced infringement when they properly carve out a patented indication.
The Court remanded the case back to the Federal Circuit but provided guidance on induced infringement and the use of skinny labels. Demonstrating inducement requires a generic's affirmative conduct. However, the Court noted the inducement cannot be based only on vague language. Active inducement can be accomplished through implicit encouragement, but the inducement must be clear and affirmative.
Generics wanting to use skinny labels should continue to exercise caution when issuing statements to reduce the likelihood of infringement. While brand manufacturers still have a path forward, the bar has been raised, and they must allege affirmative steps were taken to encourage patented use.
Listen as our authoritative panel of patent attorneys discusses the Supreme Court's recent Hikma v. Amarin decision and any other relevant pharmaceutical litigation, and the implications for induced infringement cases. The panel will also discuss strategies and tactics regarding claim language and label language for brand and generic drug makers, as well as types of evidence to adduce to prove inducement of infringement.
Presented By
Ms. Brougher is a patent attorney who focuses on all aspects of services related to patents in the areas of biotechnology, pharmaceuticals and medical devices, including patentability opinions, due diligence, patent drafting, domestic and foreign patent prosecution, development and management of patent portfolios, and general client counseling during all phases of a product’s lifecycle, from concept to commercialization. Her patent experience covers a variety of complex and innovative inventions involving small molecule drugs, biologics, cell-based technologies, compositions, drug formulations and drug delivery systems, immunotherapeutics, medical devices, diagnostic tests, nanotechnology, and immunology, particularly vaccines and antibodies. Ms. Brougher also has experience counseling clients on the Hatch-Waxman Act and is monitoring developments involving biosimilars under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act.
Mr. Irving has more than 47 years of experience in the field of IP law. His practice includes due diligence, patent prosecution, reissue and reexamination, patent interferences, and counseling, including prelitigation, Orange Book listings of patents covering FDA-approved drugs, and infringement and validity analysis in the chemical fields, as well as litigation. Mr. Irving has served as lead counsel in many patent interferences.
Mr. Upadhye has one of the most recognizable brands in the world of brand and generic drug development. As the former chief in-house counsel at three leading pharmaceutical companies (Apotex, Inc., Sandoz-Novartis, and Eon Labs, Inc.) and as a division counsel for a medical device company (The Cook Group), he is known for spearheading innovative business and legal strategies to protect existing drug or device patents – or challenge those of a competitor. A prolific writer and frequent speaker, Mr. Upadhye is the author of dozens of articles and has spoken on topics dozens of times at key industry conferences nationally and internationally. Further, he writes the 1400+ page leading book on navigating complex U.S. laws of FDA brand/generic drug development: Generic Pharmaceutical Patent & FDA Law, now in its 13th Edition (2020).
Ms. Wang is a first-chair trial lawyer who represents biotech, pharmaceutical, and technology companies in complex and high stakes intellectual property and commercial disputes across the country. She is a go-to resource for clients in the life sciences industry, including for “bet-the-company” patent litigation (including Hatch-Waxman and biosimilar litigation), post-grant review (PGR) and inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the United States Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), trade secrets litigation, and contract, licensing, and other commercial disputes. She also routinely advises clients on the management of their US and global patent and litigation strategies, including regularly consulting with counsel before the EPO and in the UK, Germany, and other foreign jurisdictions. Ms. Wang's practice also includes regular representation of leading industry organizations in submitting amicus curiae briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on a variety of key IP issues. She is also a frequent speaker and writer on IP-related topics and policies and has served in leadership roles in numerous organizations including the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA), the Alan D. Lourie Boston Intellectual Property American Inn of Court, and the Asian American Lawyers Association of Massachusetts (AALAM).
-
This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.
-
Live Online
On Demand
Date + Time
- event
Monday, June 29, 2026
- schedule
1:00 PM ET/10:00 AM PT
I. Skinny labels and inducement
II. Recent court treatment
III. Implications of Hikma v. Amarin
IV. Demonstrating liability
V. Best practices
The panel will review these and other key issues:
- What impact will the Court's decision in Hikma v. Amarin have on proving induced infringement?
- What impact will recent decisions have on claim drafting?
- What strategic considerations should patent owners keep in mind when labeling FDA-approved drugs?
Unlimited access to premium CLE courses:
- Annual access
- Available live and on-demand
- Best for attorneys and legal professionals
Unlimited access to premium CPE courses.:
- Annual access
- Available live and on-demand
- Best for CPAs and tax professionals
Unlimited access to premium CLE, CPE, Professional Skills and Practice-Ready courses.:
- Annual access
- Available live and on-demand
- Best for legal, accounting, and tax professionals
Unlimited access to Professional Skills and Practice-Ready courses:
- Annual access
- Available on-demand
- Best for new attorneys
Related Courses
Pleading Requirements for Patent Infringement Amid Inconsistent Court Treatment
Available On-Demand
Preserving Attorney-Client Privilege in Patent Proceedings
Monday, April 20, 2026
1:00 p.m. ET/10:00 a.m. PT
Machine Learning and Patent Eligibility: Recent Court Guidance and Strategy
Available On-Demand
Induced Infringement in Pharma Litigation: Supreme Court Decision in Hikma v. Amarin, Guidance for Using Skinny Labels
Monday, June 29, 2026
1:00 PM ET/10:00 AM PT