The U.S., EU and Japan each provide RDP, a period of time after the approval of a new drug during which the regulatory agency may not rely upon the innovator’s data to approve a competitor’s generic copy. In certain markets where patent protection and other forms of market exclusivity may have expired, RDP can be of particular importance. However, most regulatory forms of exclusivity do not prevent a competitor from gaining regulatory approval prior to the expiration of RDP exclusivity on the basis of the competitor’s own safety and efficacy data on its drug, even when that drug is identical to that marketed by the innovator. When these patent rights and other forms of exclusivity expire and generic versions of a medicine are approved and marketed, there are often substantial and rapid declines in the sales of the original innovative product. For further discussion of the impact of generic competition on our business, refer to “—Competition” below. 

Specific aspects of the law governing market exclusivity and data regulatory protection for pharmaceuticals vary from country to country. The following summarizes key exclusivity rules in markets representing significant sales: 

## United States 

In the U.S., most of our key products are protected by patents with varying terms depending on the type of patent and the filing date. A significant portion of a product’s patent life, however, is lost during the time it takes an innovative company to develop and obtain regulatory approval of a new drug. As compensation at least in part for the lost patent term due to regulatory review periods, the innovator may, depending on a number of factors, apply to the government to restore lost patent term by extending the expiration date of one patent up to a maximum term of five years, provided that the extension cannot cause the patent to be in effect for more than 14 years from the date of drug approval. 

A company seeking to market an innovative pharmaceutical in the U.S. must submit a complete set of safety and efficacy data to the FDA. If the innovative pharmaceutical is a chemical product, the company files an NDA. If the medicine is a biological product, a BLA is filed. The type of application filed affects RDP exclusivity rights. 

## Chemical products 

A competitor seeking to launch a generic substitute of a chemical innovative drug in the U.S. must file an aNDA with the FDA. In the aNDA, the generic manufacturer needs to demonstrate only “bioequivalence” between the generic substitute and the approved NDA drug. The aNDA relies upon the safety and efficacy data previously filed by the innovator in its NDA. 

An innovator company is required to list certain of its patents covering the medicine with the FDA in what is commonly known as the Orange Book. Absent a successful patent challenge, the FDA cannot approve an aNDA until after the innovator’s listed patents expire. However, after the innovator has marketed its product for four years, a generic manufacturer may file an aNDA and allege that one or more of the patents listed in the Orange Book under an innovator’s NDA is invalid, unenforceable, or will not be infringed by the generic product. This allegation is commonly known as a Paragraph IV certification. The innovator then must decide whether to file a patent infringement suit against the generic manufacturer. From time to time, aNDAs including Paragraph IV certifications are filed with respect to certain of our products. We evaluate these aNDAs on a case-by-case basis and, where warranted, file suit against the generic manufacturer to protect our patent rights. 

In addition to patent protection, certain innovative pharmaceutical products can receive periods of regulatory exclusivity. An NDA that is designated as an orphan drug can receive seven years of exclusivity for the orphan indication. During this time period, neither NDAs nor aNDAs for the same drug product can be approved for the same orphan use. A company may also earn six months of additional exclusivity for a drug where specific clinical studies are conducted at the written request of the FDA to study the use of the medicine to treat pediatric patients, and submission to the FDA is made prior to the loss of basic exclusivity. 

Medicines approved under an NDA can also receive several types of RDP. An innovative chemical pharmaceutical product is entitled to five years of RDP in the U.S., during which the FDA cannot approve generic substitutes. If an innovator’s patent is challenged, as described above, a generic manufacturer may file its aNDA after the fourth year of the five-year RDP period. A pharmaceutical drug product that contains an active ingredient that has been previously approved in an NDA, but is approved in, for example, a new formulation or a new route of administration, but not for the drug itself, or for a new indication on the basis of new clinical studies, may receive three years of RDP for that formulation, route of administration, or indication. 

