United States: What You Need To Know About Retained Rights In Federally Funded Patented Drugs

The issue of drug pricing is top of mind

More than 50 members of Congress, led by Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX), sent a letter to Secretary of Health and Human Services Sylvia Matthews Burwell and to National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Francis Collins on January 11, 2016, urging the agencies "to utilize your existing statutory authority to respond to the soaring cost of pharmaceuticals" to address "price gouging" by pharmaceutical manufacturers. In particular, the members of Congress requested that NIH reverse its longstanding interpretation of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and to now exercise statutory "march-in" rights to effectuate price controls on patented drugs developed in whole or in part with federal funds.

Secretary Burwell, testifying before the House Ways and Means Committee on February 10, 2016, was asked whether the letter was being given "thorough consideration." In response, Secretary Burwell stated: "Your letter we have received, thank you, and we are continuing to try and pursue every administrative option. We've proposed legislative and statutory changes as a part of the budget, but are looking at a wide array, of which we welcome your letter and your suggestions."

Although this congressional request has been resolved favorably to the licensees of patented drugs developed in whole or in part with federal funds (as we describe below), the issue of price substantiation and of balancing a drug's price with its impact on patient outcomes is very much top of mind for payers, including the federal government. This is the first in a series of alerts focused on little-known retained rights and what pharmaceutical manufacturers should be doing to support the price being charged for drugs.

The federal government's rights

The goals and objectives of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 are: "to use the patent system to promote the utilization of inventions arising from federally supported research or development; to encourage maximum participation of small business firms in federally supported research and development efforts; to promote collaboration between commercial concerns and nonprofit organizations, including universities; to ensure that inventions made by nonprofit organizations and small business firms are used in a manner to promote free competition and enterprise without unduly encumbering future research and discovery; to promote the commercialization and public availability of inventions made in the United States by United States industry and labor; to ensure that the Government obtains sufficient rights in federally supported inventions to meet the needs of the Government and protect the public against nonuse or unreasonable use of inventions; and to minimize the costs of administering policies in this area." 35 U.S.C. §200.

To effectuate these goals and objectives, the act articulates rules governing the licensing of federal-government-owned inventions. In addition, in a significant change from the prior scheme of the government generally owning patentable inventions developed by contractors with the support of federal funds, the act grants rights to government contractors to elect title to inventions developed with federal funding. (These rights to retain ownership were expanded beyond small businesses and nonprofits by Executive Order 12591 in 1983.) The contractor then could advance and commercialize the inventions by licensing to third parties.

Safeguarding against the lack of use or misuse of retained ownership rights, the act also retains certain rights in the federal government. First, the federal funding agency retains "a nonexclusive, nontransferrable, irrevocable, paid-up license to practice or have practiced for or on behalf of the United States any subject invention throughout the world." 35 U.S.C. §202(c)(4). Second, the federal funding agency retains the right to request "the contractor, an assignee or exclusive licensee of a subject invention to grant a nonexclusive, partially exclusive, or exclusive license in any field of use to a responsible applicant or applicants, upon terms that are reasonable under the circumstances." 35 U.S.C. §203(a).

In the event the contractor, assignee or licensee refuses the request from the federal funding agency, under certain limited circumstances, the federal funding agency has the power to require the contractor, assignee or licensee to grant the license. This power, known as the "march-in" right, is available only in one of the following circumstances:

  • Because the contractor, assignee or licensee has not taken, or is not expected to take within a reasonable time, effective steps to achieve practical application of the subject invention in such field of use
  • To alleviate health or safety needs which are not reasonably satisfied by the contractor, assignee or licensees
  • To meet requirements for public use specified by federal regulation, when such requirements are not reasonably satisfied by the contractor, assignee or licensees
  • Because the required agreement to manufacture the products substantially in the United States has not be obtained or waived, or because the licensee breaches the agreement. 35 U.S.C. §(a)(1-4)

Thus, while the contractor obtains title to the invention, that title is not absolute. The federal funding agency may either: (a) exercise its royalty-free rights in the invention for or on behalf of the federal government, or (b) assert its march-in rights to require the grant of a license to a third party. These federally retained rights are what are at issue both in the requests of the members of Congress to Secretary Burwell and Director Collins, and in a petition relating to the federally funded patented drug enzalutamide discussed below.

NIH's pronouncements on march-in rights with respect to drug pricing

Importantly to the bio-pharma industry—which often relies on the government for funding of novel technologies, or for collaborations to address emerging threats such as Zika and Ebola viruses—at no time since the enactment of the Bayh-Dole Act has NIH exercised its march-in rights. On five occasions, in response to requests that it exercise those rights, the NIH has issued determinations explaining its rationale for declining to exercise march-in rights. In three of those determinations, the requesters cited pricing as the basis for requesting the exercise of march-in rights.

The NIH has consistently determined that cost or pricing of inventions is not appropriately addressed through a march-in proceeding. In the first of the determinations, "In the Case of Novir® Manufactured by Abbott Laboratories, Inc. (2004)," the NIH stated:

Finally, the issue of the cost or pricing of drugs that include inventive technologies made using Federal Funds is one which has attracted the attention of Congress in several contexts that are much broader than the one at hand. In addition, because the market dynamics for all products developed pursuant to licensing rights under the Bayh-Dole Act could be altered if prices on such products were directed in any way by NIH, the NIH agrees with the public testimony that suggested that the extraordinary remedy of march-in is not an appropriate means of controlling prices. The issue of drug pricing has global implications and, thus, is appropriately left for Congress to address legislatively. [Italics added]

The second determination, "In the Case of Xalatan® Manufactured by Pfizer, Inc. (2004)," resulted in a very similar statement:

Finally, the issue of the cost or pricing of drugs that include inventive technologies made using Federal Funds is one which has attracted the attention of Congress in several contexts that are much broader than the one at hand. In addition, because the market dynamics for all products developed pursuant to licensing rights under the Bayh-Dole Act could be altered if prices on such products were directed in any way by NIH, the NIH agrees with the public testimony that suggested that the extraordinary remedy of march-in is not an appropriate means of controlling prices. The issue of whether drugs should be sold in the United States for the same price as they are sold in Canada and Europe has global implications and, thus, is appropriately left for Congress to address legislatively. [Italics added]

More recently, in 2013, Novir® again was at issue in the determination "In the Case of Novir® Manufactured by AbbVie (2013)." Several public interest groups requested the NIH exercise march-in rights with respect to Novir primarily because of the drug's pricing. The requestors proposed two rules relating to price: (1) establishing a rebuttable presumption that the price for a drug in the US is not reasonable if it is greater than the price in seven of the 10 largest countries; and (2) requiring the secretary of HHS to grant licenses to third parties to use NIH funded inventions subject to the payment of a reasonable royalty and appropriate field of use. The NIH, in a determination signed by Director Collins, reached the following conclusion:

We do not think that the AbbVie pricing policies and pricing disparities between the United States and other countries trigger any of the four Bayh-Dole march-in criteria...

The NIH is sensitive to the impact of the pricing of drugs and their availability to patients. As in 2004, when similar pricing and availability issues were raised and discussed at public hearings, the NIH's role in the present case is limited to compliance with the Bayh-Dole Act, including its march-in criteria...

Drug pricing and patient access are broad and challenging issues in the United States. The NIH continues to agree with the public testimony in 2004 that the extraordinary remedy of march-in is not an appropriate means of controlling prices of drugs broadly available to physicians and patients. [Italics added]

Secretary Burwell recognized these prior precedents in her March 2, 2016, response to Rep. Doggett. In her response letter, Secretary Burwell stated:

The NIH considered using its march-in authority to address drug pricing concerns in 2004 for Novir® (ritonavir) and Xalatan® (latanoprost), and in 2013 for the pricing of Novir® a second time... In each review, the NIH considered whether the marketed drug met the statutory requirements to justify use of the march-in authority and determined that it did not." [footnotes omitted]

As the conclusion to her response, Secretary Burwell did note the following:

NIH considers the application of the march-in statute on a case-by-case basis, and is prepared to use its authority if presented with a case where the statutory criteria are met regarding the commercialization and use of an NIH-funded, patented invention, and where march-in could in fact alleviate health or safety needs, or address a situation where effective steps are not being taken to achieve practical application of the inventions. After consulting with the NIH, we believe the statutory criteria are sufficiently clear and additional guidance is not needed.

The issue is not closed, but the recent response is positive

In the meantime, the opportunity for NIH to change its long-held positon on the impropriety of exercising march-in rights to effectuate price controls on patented drugs developed with federal funds was put before the NIH. On January 14, 2016, Knowledge Ecology International and the Union for Affordable Cancer Treatment submitted a request to Secretary Burwell, Director Collins and Defense Secretary Ashton Carter. They requested that the federal government "use its rights in patents for the prostate cancer drug (enzalutamide), marketed under the brand name Xtandi by Japan-based Astellas Pharma... Specifically, we ask the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and/or the Department of Defense (DoD) to use its royalty-free rights in the relevant patents, or to grant this request for march-in rights." The basis for this request is that: "This is a product that has an average wholesale price (AWP) of $129,269 per year, and which is far more expensive in the United States than in other countries."

The requestors also make a broader request: "More generally, we ask the U.S. federal government to adopt the policy that the federal government will use its royalty free rights, or grant licenses under federal march-in rights, when prices in the United States are excessive, and/or higher than they are in high income foreign countries, and to apply that policy in this case for patents on enzalutamide."

With respect to this request relating to Xtandi, and in response to Secretary Burwell's March 2, 2016, letter, Rep. Doggett issued the following statement:

When Americans pay for research that results in a pharmaceutical, that drug should be available at a reasonable price. While establishing guidance to discourage widespread price gouging is clearly justified, I am pleased that the Administration is prepared to use existing authority on a case-by-case basis to address this problem.

It should do so immediately by responding favorably to the pending petition for Xtandi, a prostate cancer drug, which taxpayers funded through U.S. Army and NIH grants. A Japanese licensee, Astellas, is charging Americans $129,000 for this drug, which sells in Japan and Sweden for $39,000, and in Canada for $30,000. Nowhere in the world is it remotely as expensive in the United States. Licensing patents to competitors would mean lower drug prices through competition.

An unaffordable drug is 100% ineffective. Americans shouldn't have to choose between their lives and their livelihoods on this and many other outrageously priced pharmaceuticals.

Rep. Doggett's statement, however, fails to take into account the more than 10 years of consistent and repeated NIH determinations, as recited in Secretary Burwell's reply, that NIH does not have the authority to exercise its retained rights on the basis of pricing or cost. Secretary Burwell's reaffirmation of this position in her reply to Rep. Doggett should give some level of comfort to pharmaceutical manufacturers that are subject to federal retained rights.

However, the focus and attention on drug pricing is not likely to go away. In our next bulletin, we will address the key aspects of price substantiation that all pharmaceutical manufacturers should focus on, and for which they are developing their strategy and position.

Dentons is the world's first polycentric global law firm. A top 20 firm on the Acritas 2015 Global Elite Brand Index, the Firm is committed to challenging the status quo in delivering consistent and uncompromising quality and value in new and inventive ways. Driven to provide clients a competitive edge, and connected to the communities where its clients want to do business, Dentons knows that understanding local cultures is crucial to successfully completing a deal, resolving a dispute or solving a business challenge. Now the world's largest law firm, Dentons' global team builds agile, tailored solutions to meet the local, national and global needs of private and public clients of any size in more than 125 locations serving 50-plus countries. www.dentons.com.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions