# UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/agency%3Aftc%3Aa46a3e0f1471262d

## Record

- **Collection:** Agency decision
- **Document type:** Agency decision

## Text

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580

Bureau of Competition
May 21, 2025
David R. McAvoy
Chief Legal Officer
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.
c/o Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.
400 Interpace Pkwy, Suite 3
Parsippany, NJ 07054
Re:

Brian Savage, SVP and General Counsel
Global Litigation Teva Pharmaceuticals
USA, Inc. 400 Interpace Pkwy, Suite 3
Parsippany, NJ 07054
brian.savage@tevapharm.com

Improper Orange Book Patent Listings for AirDuo Respiclick, AirDuo Digihaler,
ArmonAir Respiclick, and ArmonAir Digihaler

Dear Counsel,
I write regarding Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.’s (“Teva”) ongoing obligation to
ensure the propriety of its patent listings in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic
Equivalence Evaluations (the “Orange Book”), particularly in light of the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit’s decision in Teva Branded Pharm. Prods. R&D, Inc. v. Amneal Pharms.
of N.Y., LLC, 124 F.4th 898 (Fed. Cir. 2024) (hereinafter “Teva v. Amneal”).
The FTC has previously explained that patents improperly listed in the Orange Book may
harm competition and delay generic drug entry, as courts have recognized.1 On April 30, 2024,
the FTC’s Bureau of Competition (the “Bureau”) sent Teva a letter identifying a non-exhaustive
list of patents that Teva had improperly submitted for listing in the Orange Book and explained
how improper Orange Book listings may harm competition.2 Since that letter was sent, the
1
Fed. Trade Comm’n, Statement Concerning Brand Drug Manufacturers’ Improper Listing of Patents in the
Orange Book (Sept. 14, 2023), https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/
p239900orangebookpolicystatement092023.pdf; Brief for Fed. Trade Comm’n as Amicus Curiae, SmithKline
Beecham Corp. v. Apotex Corp., No. 99-CV-4304 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 28, 2003),
https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/amicus_briefs/smithkline-beecham-corp.v.apotexcorp./smithklineamicus.pdf; Caraco Pharm. Labs., Ltd. v. Novo Nordisk A/S, 566 U.S. 399, 408 (2012); see also
Massachusetts Laborers' Health & Welfare Fund v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharms., Inc., No. 24-CV-10565-DJC,
2025 WL 928747, at *20 (D. Mass. Mar. 27, 2025) (“[Plaintiff’s] alleged injury, having to pay higher prices for
drugs it otherwise would not need to but for [Defendants’] allegedly wrongful listing, is the precisely the kind of
‘[t]hreaten[ed] economic harm to consumers [that] is plainly sufficient to authorize injunctive relief.’” (quoting New
York ex rel. Schneiderman v. Actavis PLC, 787 F.3d 638, 661 (2d Cir. 2015) (cleaned up)).
2
April 30, 2024 Letter from R. Rao, Deputy Director, Bureau of Competition, to Teva Pharm. Indus., Inc.,
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/teva-pharm-industries-digis-and-respiclicks-4302024.pdf.

Federal Circuit’s ruling in the Teva v. Amneal case has confirmed that the identified patents do
not meet applicable Orange Book listing criteria.3
While Teva has requested the delisting of patents specifically at issue in the Federal
Circuit’s Teva v. Amneal decision, a number of other patents included in the Bureau’s prior
delisting letter remain in the Orange Book as of the date of this letter, including the following:
NDA

208799

208799

3

Product(s)

1, 2, 3

4, 5, 6

Proprietary
Name

AirDuo
Respiclick

AirDuo
Digihaler

Patent Number

Listing Type

8651103

DP

8714149

DP

8978966

DP

9216260

DP

9463288

DP

9731087

DP

10022510

DP

10124131

DP

10765820

DP

8651103

DP

8714149

DP

8978966

DP

9216260

DP

9463288

DP

9731087

DP

9782550

DP

9782551

DP

10022510

DP

10124131

DP

10569034

DP

10765820

DP

11000653

DP

11266796

DP

11351317

DP

11357935

DP

Teva v. Amneal, 124 F.4th at 911 (explaining that a patent claims the drug as required for listing in the Orange
Book “when it particularly points out and distinctly claims the drug as the invention.”).

208798

208798

1, 2, 3, 7

4, 5, 6, 8

ArmonAir
Respiclick

ArmonAir
Digihaler

11439777

DP

11464923

DP

8651103

DP

8714149

DP

8978966

DP

9216260

DP

9463288

DP

9731087

DP

10022510

DP

10124131

DP

10765820

DP

8651103

DP

8714149

DP

8978966

DP

9216260

DP

9463288

DP

9731087

DP

9782550

DP

9782551

DP

10022510

DP

10124131

DP

10569034

DP

10765820

DP

11000653

DP

11266796

DP

11351317

DP

11357935

DP

11439777

DP

11464923

DP

With the above patents still in the Orange Book, we are, contemporaneously with this
letter, submitting patent listing dispute communications to the FDA regarding these patents.
Although we have not, at this time, disputed the listing of any other Teva patents, it is Teva’s
responsibility to ensure that all of its patent listings comply with the statutory listing
requirements, as clarified by Teva v. Amneal.

Combatting improper Orange Book patent listings has been a part of the FTC’s longstanding enforcement and advocacy work to challenge anticompetitive conduct that stymies
generic drug entry and the resulting substantial cost savings.4 The FTC will remain vigilant to
promote competition and protect the American public from the harms that flow from
anticompetitive practices in the pharmaceutical industry.
Sincerely,
/s/ Kelse Moen
Kelse Moen
Deputy Director
Bureau of Competition

4

See, e.g., Biovail Corp., 134 F.T.C. 407 (2002), https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cases/
2002/10/biovaildo.pdf; Brief for Fed. Trade Comm’n as Amicus Curiae, Jazz Pharms., Inc. v. Avadel CNS Pharms.
No. 1:21-cv-00691 (D. Del. Nov. 10, 2022), ECF No. 222-3; Brief for Fed. Trade Comm’n as Amicus Curiae, Teva
Branded Pharm. Prods. R&D, Inc. v. Amneal Pharms. of N.Y., LLC, No. 24-1936 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 6, 2024), ECF No.
62; see also Mem. of Law of Amicus Curiae the Federal Trade Commission in Opp’n to Defs.’ Mot. to Dismiss, In
re: Buspirone Patent Litig., MDL Docket No. 1410 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 8, 2002),
https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/amicus_briefs/re-buspirone-antitrust-litigation/buspirone.pdf; see
also Fed. Trade Comm’n, Overview of FTC Actions in Pharmaceutical Products and Distribution (Sept. 2021),
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/attachments/competition-policyguidance/overview_of_ftc_actions_in_pharmaceutical_products_and_distribution.pdf.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/agency%3Aftc%3Aa46a3e0f1471262d. Public record. Not legal advice.
