PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 5, 2019
Fair And Immediate Release of Generic Drugs Act or the FAIR Generics Act
This bill disqualifies from being a first applicant an applicant submitting a generic drug application to the Food and Drug Administration if the applicant has entered into a specified disqualifying agreement. Currently, any generic drug applicant submitting an application on the first day an application is submitted for that drug is a first applicant and is granted a 180-day marketing exclusivity period.
A disqualifying agreement is an agreement between the applicant and the holder of the application or a patent for the brand-name drug whereby the applicant agrees not to seek approval or begin marketing the generic drug until the expiration of the exclusivity period awarded to another applicant.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill expands the definition of first applicant to include applicants that did not submit an application on the first day an application was submitted. To be included, these first applicants must not have a patent infringement action pending against them and must not have been found to have infringed a patent. If an applicant that submitted an application on the first day an application was submitted has begun marketing the drug, a first applicant that submitted after the first day may not begin marketing until 30 days after the first-day applicant began marketing.
A first applicant that has entered into an agreement to not seek approval of an application or begin marketing at the earliest possible date may not seek approval or begin marketing until the earlier of (1) the latest date set forth in the agreement, or (2) 180 days after a first day applicant begins marketing.
People & committees
Rep. Barragan, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1506 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1506 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1506 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1506 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.