Roche to Amgen: We Surrender

Recs

5

It appears that another round of Amgen (Nasdaq: AMGN) and Roche's anemia-drug wars is over. Yesterday, Roche gave in to a judge's recommendation that it pay a higher royalty to Amgen on sales of its anemia drug Mircera -- if it's allowed on the market at all.

Roche and Amgen have been feuding about whether Roche's Mircera violates the patents on Amgen's $6 billion-a-year anemia drug franchise, comprising Epogen and Aranesp. The FDA approved Mircera last November, as a treatment for chronic kidney disease, but because of a patent-lawsuit loss against Amgen, Roche has not been able to sell the drug in the U.S.

In February, a judge presiding over the patent case proposed several conditions under which Roche might be able to release Mircera. Most importantly, the judge requested that Roche pay Amgen a 22.5% royalty on sales of Mircera. Roche balked at the size of the royalty rate, proposing 20% instead. But apparently, Roche decided to give in yesterday -- as if the court had given the company any choice -- and accept the higher rate.

The arguments continue
Yet Roche's decision doesn't end the dispute. Amgen has argued to the judge that Mircera should be barred from the market outright, since Roche lost the patent-infringement lawsuit. Past results in cases like this have been mixed, but I'm inclined to believe that this particular judge will give his blessing to Mircera, now that Roche has agreed to his terms. Nevertheless, a final decision on whether Mircera will be allowed on the market remains pending.

The stakes are high for Amgen. The U.S. is one of Amgen and partner Johnson & Johnson's (NYSE: JNJ) last major bastions of monopoly control over the erythropoiesis-stimulating-agent anemia-drug market, via Aranesp, Epogen, and J&J's Procrit. In the European Union, Amgen faces many more competitors. Since it's likely that the royalty Roche pays Amgen on Mircera sales will be lower than Amgen's margins on Aranesp or Epogen, it's understandable why Amgen is in no hurry to open the U.S. anemia-drug market any wider. 

Closed for 15 months – opening 10 days only! Get notified ahead of time as our expert portfolio manager invests $1 MILLION in the best opportunities from across The Motley Fool’s premium investment services. This is the first open since August 2008, by invitation only. Enter email below.

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

Be the first one to comment on this article.

Compare Brokers

TD AMERITRADE
more info
ShareBuilder
more info
Power E*Trade

more info
Scottrade
more info
Fool Disclosure

DocumentId: 602724, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 11/8/2009 6:01:15 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

The Must-Read Story on Fool.com
Which Companies Can Buy It Like Buffett?

Related Tickers

11/6/2009 4:00 PM
JNJ $60.30 Up +0.32 +0.53%
Johnson & Johnson CAPS Rating: *****
AMGN $54.69 Up +0.64 +1.18%
Amgen, Inc. CAPS Rating: ****

Community: Investing Wiki

Term Of The Hour

Buying in thirds: Buying in thirds is a time-honored Motley Fool practice, teaching investors to enter an eventual "full" stockholding in three separate lots. This is typically advisable for those who are new to investing, those who like a stock long-term but worry about its present valuation being high, and those who like to dollar-cost average.

Want to learn more or edit this definition?
Click here to read more!