Contact Congress about H.R. 890: Stopping Pharma’s Ripoffs and Drug Savings For All Act
Drug companies could lose extra patent time on later patents for the same drug or biologic. They can keep it only if they prove the later patent is truly different. The Patent Office would also review how it examines these patents.
Modern Action explains legislation in plain English, helps you choose whether to support, oppose, or ask for changes, and drafts a message tied to the bill, your stance, and the elected officials who can act on it.
Stopping Pharma’s Ripoffs and Drug Savings For All Act is a House bill in committee. The latest recorded action: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Latest action on H.R. 890: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Who this affects: This bill mainly affects brand-name drug and biologic companies, generic drug makers, biosimilar companies, and the Patent Office. It could matter most in lawsuits and other patent fights over how long one company can keep competitors off the market. Patients could feel the effects later if the bill changes when cheaper competing products can enter.
Why this matters: This bill matters because extra patents can keep lower-cost competitors off the market longer for the same drug or biologic. The bill tries to limit that by cutting back later patent time in certain cases unless the company proves the later patent is truly different. It also pushes the Patent Office to look more closely at repeat patents on the same product. The exact effect on prices, access, and drug research would depend on how courts and the USPTO apply the new rules.
Key provisions in H.R. 890
- Creates a new patent rule for some drug and biologic fights. Under it, later patents are treated as if they gave up any time that lasts past the first patent to expire on that product.
- Uses this rule in three kinds of cases. Those are drug challenges under section 505(c) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, biologic fights under section 351(l) of the Public Health Service Act, and certain federal court cases under 35 U.S.C. 271(e)(2).
- Lets patent owners beat that rule if they prove the later patent covers a truly different invention. They must meet the usual civil standard, called a preponderance of the evidence, which means more likely than not.
- Keeps patent-term extensions in place when a patent is proven to be truly different. The owner loses that extra time only if it clearly gives it up in writing.
- Requires the USPTO Director to do a full review of how the agency examines drug and biologic patents. The review must focus on whether the agency is doing enough to avoid granting follow-on patents that are not meaningfully different.
How Modern Action helps you take action on H.R. 890
You do not have to start with a blank letter. Modern Action turns the bill, your position, and the relevant congressional context into a message you can edit and send. The goal is to make contacting Congress clear, specific, and useful without forcing you to parse bill text or figure out the right office on your own.
Questions people ask about H.R. 890
- What is H.R. 890?
- Drug companies could lose extra patent time on later patents for the same drug or biologic. They can keep it only if they prove the later patent is truly different. The Patent Office would also review how it examines these patents.
- How do I support or oppose H.R. 890?
- Choose support, oppose, or ask for changes on Modern Action. The action flow drafts the message for you and keeps the wording tied to this bill.
- Who should I contact about H.R. 890?
- Modern Action uses your location to route the action to the congressional offices relevant to the bill and your representation.
- Can Modern Action explain H.R. 890 before I act?
- Yes. Modern Action gives you a plain-English summary, current status, and action context before you send anything.
