Biohaven Ltd. (BHVN) Risk Analysis

We own or license patents in the U.S. and foreign countries that protect our products, their methods of use and manufacture, as well as other innovations relating to the advancement of our science to help bring new therapies to patients. We also develop brand names and trademarks for our products to differentiate them in the marketplace. We consider the overall protection of our patents, trademarks, licenses and other intellectual property rights to be of material value and act to protect these rights from infringement. We also rely on trade secrets to protect aspects of our business that are not amenable to, or that we do not consider appropriate for, patent protection. Our success will depend significantly on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other proprietary protection for commercially important technology, inventions and know-how related to our business, defend and enforce our patents, preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets and operate without infringing the valid and enforceable patents and other proprietary rights of third parties. We also rely on know-how, continuing technological innovation and in-licensing opportunities to develop, strengthen and maintain the proprietary position of our products and development programs. In the biopharmaceutical industry, a substantial portion of an innovative product's commercial value is usually realized during the period in which the product has market exclusivity. A product's market exclusivity is generally determined by two forms of intellectual property: patent rights held by the innovator company and any regulatory forms of exclusivity to which the innovative drug is entitled. Patents are a key determinant of market exclusivity for most pharmaceuticals. Patents provide the innovator with the right to exclude others from practicing an invention related to the medicine. Patents may cover, among other things, the active ingredient(s), various uses of a drug product, discovery tools, pharmaceutical formulations, drug delivery mechanisms and processes for (or intermediates useful in) the manufacture of products. Protection for individual products extends for varying periods in accordance with the expiration dates of patents in the various countries. The protection afforded, which may also vary from country to country, depends upon the type of patent, its scope of coverage and the availability of meaningful legal remedies in the country. Market exclusivity can also be influenced by regulatory data protection ("RDP"). Many developed countries provide certain non-patent incentives for the development of medicines. For example, in the U.S., the EU, the United Kingdom, Japan, and certain other countries, RDP intellectual property rights are offered to: (i) provide a time period of data protection during which a generic company is not allowed to rely on the innovator's data in seeking approval; (ii) restore patent term lost during drug development and approval; and (iii) provide incentives for research on medicines for rare diseases, or orphan drugs, and on medicines useful in treating pediatric patients. These incentives can extend the market exclusivity period on a product beyond the patent term. Product Exclusivity – United States In the United States, biopharmaceutical 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. Small Molecule Products A competitor seeking to launch a generic substitute of small molecule 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 FDA's Orange Book. The FDA cannot approve an ANDA until after the innovator's listed patents expire unless there is a successful patent challenge. 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 either invalid or not infringed (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. 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 a new formulation, 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 or indication. Biologic products The ACA created an approval pathway for biosimilar versions of innovative biological products that did not previously exist. Prior to that time, innovative biologics had essentially unlimited regulatory exclusivity. Under the new regulatory mechanism, the FDA can approve products that are similar to (but not generic copies of) innovative biologics on the basis of less extensive data than is required by a full Biologics License Application ("BLA"). After an innovator has marketed its product for four years, any manufacturer may file an application for approval of a "biosimilar" version of the innovator product. However, although an application for approval of a biosimilar version may be filed four years after approval of the innovator product, qualified innovative biological products will receive 12 years of regulatory exclusivity, meaning that the FDA may not approve a biosimilar version until 12 years after the innovative biological product was first approved by the FDA. The law also provides a mechanism for innovators to enforce the patents that protect innovative biological products and for biosimilar applicants to challenge the patents. Such patent litigation may begin as early as four years after the innovative biological product is first approved by the FDA. In the U.S., the increased likelihood of generic and biosimilar challenges to innovators' intellectual property has increased the risk of loss of innovators' market exclusivity. First, generic companies have increasingly sought to challenge innovators' basic patents covering major pharmaceutical products. Second, statutory and regulatory provisions in the U.S. limit the ability of an innovator company to prevent generic and biosimilar drugs from being approved and launched while patent litigation is ongoing. As a result of all of these developments, it is not possible to predict the length of market exclusivity for a particular product with certainty based solely on the expiration of the relevant patent(s) or the current forms of regulatory exclusivity. Foreign Regulation In order to market any product outside of the United States, we would need to comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries and jurisdictions regarding quality, safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials, marketing authorization, commercial sales and distribution of our products. Although many of the issues discussed above with respect to the United States apply similarly in the context of the EU and other geographies, the approval process varies between countries and jurisdictions and can involve additional product testing and additional administrative review periods. The time required to obtain approval in other countries and jurisdictions might differ from and be longer than that required to obtain FDA approval. Regulatory approval in one country or jurisdiction does not ensure regulatory approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country or jurisdiction may negatively impact the regulatory process in others. European Union A typical route used by innovator companies to obtain marketing authorization of pharmaceutical products in the EU is through the "centralized procedure." A company seeking to market an innovative pharmaceutical product through the centralized procedure must file a complete set of safety data and efficacy data as part of a MAA with the EMA. After the EMA evaluates the MAA, it provides a recommendation to the EC and the EC then approves or denies the MAA. It is also possible for new chemical products to obtain marketing authorization in the EU through a "mutual recognition procedure," in which an application is made to a single member state, and if the member state approves the pharmaceutical product under a national procedure, then the applicant may submit that approval to the mutual recognition procedure of some or all other member states. After obtaining marketing authorization approval, a company must obtain pricing and reimbursement for the pharmaceutical product, which is typically subject to member state law. In certain EU countries, this process can take place simultaneously while the product is marketed but in other EU countries, this process must be completed before the company can market the new product. The pricing and reimbursement procedure can take months and sometimes years to complete. Throughout the EU, all products for which marketing authorizations have been filed are subject to an "8+2+1" regime. Eight years after the innovator has received its first community authorization for a medicinal product, a generic company may file a MAA for that product with the health authorities. If the MAA is approved, the generic company may not commercialize the product until after either 10 or 11 years have elapsed from the initial marketing authorization granted to the innovator. The possible extension to 11 years is available if the innovator, during the first eight years of the marketing authorization, obtains an additional indication that is of significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing treatments. For products that were filed prior to October/November 2005, there is a 10-year period of data protection under the centralized procedures and a period of either six or 10 years under the mutual recognition procedure (depending on the member state). In contrast to the U.S., patents in the EU are not listed with regulatory authorities. Generic versions of pharmaceutical products can be approved after data protection expires, regardless of whether the innovator holds patents covering its drug. Thus, it is possible that an innovator may be seeking to enforce its patents against a generic competitor that is already marketing its product. Also, the European patent system has an opposition procedure in which generic manufacturers may challenge the validity of patents covering innovator products within nine months of grant. In general, EU law treats chemically-synthesized drugs and biologically-derived drugs the same with respect to intellectual property and data protection. In addition to the relevant legislation and annexes related to biologic medicinal products, the EMA has issued guidelines that outline the additional information to be provided for biosimilar products, also known as generic biologics, in order to review an application for marketing approval. Japan In Japan, medicines of new chemical entities are generally afforded eight years of data exclusivity for approved indications and dosage. Patents on pharmaceutical products are enforceable. Generic copies can receive regulatory approval after data exclusivity and patent expirations. As in the U.S., patents in Japan may be extended to compensate for the patent term lost during the regulatory review process. In general, Japanese law treats chemically-synthesized and biologically-derived drugs the same with respect to intellectual property and market exclusivity. Rest of the World In countries outside of the U.S., the EU and Japan, there is a wide variety of legal systems with respect to intellectual property and market exclusivity of pharmaceuticals. Most other developed countries utilize systems similar to either the U.S. or the EU. Among developing countries, some have adopted patent laws and/or regulatory exclusivity laws, while others have not. Some developing countries have formally adopted laws in order to comply with World Trade Organization ("WTO") commitments, but have not taken steps to implement these laws in a meaningful way. Enforcement of WTO actions is a long process between governments, and there is no assurance of the outcome.