- videocam Live Webinar with Live Q&A
- calendar_month October 8, 2026 @ 1:00 PM ET/10:00 AM PT
- signal_cellular_alt Intermediate
- card_travel Patent
- schedule 90 minutes
The 505(b)(2) Pathway: Patent Certifications, Exclusivity, and Choosing Between an NDA and an ANDA
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 webinar will guide patent counsel on the strategic, regulatory, and litigation considerations surrounding FDA 505(b)(2) applications. The panel will address patent issues in the initial drug development records, patent certification and Orange Book strategy, and exclusivities, among other things.
Description
Section 505(b)(2) of the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act creates a hybrid approval route that is between a new drug application and an abbreviated application for a generic. An applicant submits a new drug application but relies in part on the FDA's prior findings of safety and effectiveness for a drug it does not own, supplementing that reliance with its own data or with published literature. The pathway has become the preferred option for reformulations, fixed-dose combinations, and repurposed molecules. The consequences for patent certification and exclusivity differ from those attaching to an abbreviated new drug application.
The FDA announced in August 2026 new draft guidance entitled "Determining Whether to Submit an ANDA or a 505(b)(2) Application." This guidance is to assist applicants in determining which abbreviated approval pathway under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act is appropriate for the submission of a marketing application to the FDA. The 2026 guidance revises the 2019 guidance titled "Determining Whether to Submit an ANDA or a 505(b)(2) Application."
Listen as our authoritative panel of patent attorneys examines the strategic, regulatory, and litigation considerations surrounding FDA 505(b)(2) applications. The panel will discuss whether a 505(b)(2) or ANDA pathway is most appropriate as well as implications of the FDA's recent guidance. The panel will also examine Orange Book and patent certification strategies and the litigation challenges that arise before and after approval. The panel will address FDA exclusivities and will offer best practices for navigating the 505(b)(2) pathway.
Presented By
Mr. Batzer is an experienced patent lawyer, litigating patents for both brand and generic pharmaceutical companies for the last 15-plus years. With extensive experience in Paragraph IV litigation on both the generic and brand sides, including 505(b)(2) products, and additional experience in patent prosecution of brand portfolios, both domestic and worldwide, he brings knowledge from all angles to his client’s cases. Mr. Batzer has also litigated patent cases in the medical device, dietary supplement, mechanical, and gaming fields, as well as experience in trademark and commercial litigation. His litigation experience also includes numerous Federal Circuit appeals. Mr. Batzer is also an experienced patent prosecutor outside of pharmaceuticals, with experience in the dietary supplement and medical and dental device industries, as well as design patents. Additionally, he commonly advises clients on a variety of contracts and intellectual property matters, including freedom to operate opinions, trademarks, supply and distribution agreements, trademark and patent licenses, confidentiality agreements, and the like.
Mr. Bruno is a seasoned patent litigator with 15+ years of experience representing branded, biosimilar, and generic pharmaceutical companies in high-stakes disputes. Known for his courtroom command and strategic creativity, he has guided clients to victory at every level, from bench trials and IPRs to the Federal Circuit and U.S. Supreme Court. Mr. Bruno has co-first-chaired a Hatch-Waxman trial, direct- and cross-examined inventors and expert witnesses, and championed impactful case strategies through discovery in many pharmaceutical cases, including matters involving antibiotics, oncology drugs, sleep aids, ocular drops, topical treatments, and biologics. He was among the first to litigate under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act. His litigation experience and success spans the full range of forums, including district courts, the ITC, the PTAB, the Federal Circuit, and the Supreme Court. Known for sharp deposition skills and creative procedural tactics, Mr. Bruno often finds unconventional paths to favorable outcomes, including through early dispositive motions and tailored discovery strategies.
Mr. Tang combines a creative and assertive litigation style with a superb technical training (molecular biology, bio-engineering) in his legal practice. He has appeared regularly and argued recently in the Federal Circuit, led and participated in bench trials in Federal District Courts and inter partes review in the Patent Office, and litigated numerous patent cases covering a broad range of technical fields, such as pharmaceuticals, methods of treatment, and electronics. Mr. Tang is also experienced in handling cases involving shareholder and partnership disputes, white collar defense, trademark disputes, and allegations and counter-allegations of false advertisement, unfair business practice, antitrust violation, and theft of trade secret. He serves as an arbitrator with the American Arbitration Association. Mr. Tang is particularly adept at working with expert witnesses in a wide range of technology spaces, including medicine, pharmaceutics, formulation design, dosage form manufacturing, the chemical arts, crystal forms and amorphous forms, the drug discovery process, biotechnology, biologics production, mechanical devices, computer software, computer modeling, engineering (for example computer chip design and manufacturing), economics, sales and marketing, and patent office and FDA procedures.
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).
-
This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.
-
Live Online
On Demand
Date + Time
- event
Thursday, October 8, 2026
- schedule
1:00 PM ET/10:00 AM PT
I. Statutory framework and selecting a pathway
A. When to use (b)(2) versus ANDA; strategic considerations to avoid patents via (b)(2) route instead of ANDA route
B. The Aug. 2026 new FDA draft guidance: https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/determining-whether-submit-anda-or-505b2-application-0
II. Development and application issues
A. Patent issues in the initial drug development records and how such records can come back to haunt you later in patent litigation
B. Similarities to the ANDA
III. Patent certification and Orange Book strategy
IV. Litigation Issues
A. Conducting (b)(2) type patent litigation, accelerating cases to align with potential PDUFA approval timelines; antitrust issues post-tentative approval
B. Patent litigation strategy to avoid the RLD patents and how such statements can be harmful when the (b)(2) is approved, patents are listed, and later litigated against ANDA sponsors
V. FDA issues and other exclusivity
A. FDA exclusivities available? NCE or three-year market, or seven-year Orphan Drug. Related patent strategies for longer living exclusivities.
B. Can one obtain "interchangeability" status for a (b)(2) application and treat it like an ANDA?
VI. Best practices
The panel will review these and other key issues:
- What are the product characteristics that make an ANDA unavailable and require a 505(b)(2) application?
- What Orange Book patent certifications and paragraph IV notice letters are required for a 505(b)(2) filing?
- What is the litigation exposure under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2) and the 30-month stay?
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
Obviousness-Type Double Patenting: Navigating the Evolving Doctrine at the USPTO and Federal Circuit
Thursday, October 1, 2026
1:00 PM ET/10:00 AM PT
The 505(b)(2) Pathway: Patent Certifications, Exclusivity, and Choosing Between an NDA and an ANDA
Thursday, October 8, 2026
1:00 PM ET/10:00 AM PT