PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text: CR S5000)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 31, 2025
Reforming Evergreening and Manipulation that Extends Drug Years Act or the REMEDY Act
This bill limits the scope of a 30-month stay on approval of a generic drug by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) while patent litigation involving the reference (brand-name) drug is ongoing.
Generally, entities seeking approval of a new drug must provide the FDA with information on patents claiming the drug or a method of use. Entities seeking approval of a generic drug must certify for each such patent on the reference drug that (1) the patent has expired or will expire before the generic is marketed, or (2) the patent is invalid or inapplicable to the generic drug. If a generic drug applicant certifies that a patent is invalid or inapplicable and a patent infringement suit is timely brought, the FDA is prohibited from approving the generic for 30 months (unless the patent litigation is resolved sooner). Under current law, this 30-month stay applies to patent litigation on any number of patents on a reference drug, provided the patent information was filed with the FDA before the generic application.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Under the bill, when an entity applies to the FDA for approval of a new drug, the entity must select only one patent to be eligible for the 30-month stay. This selection may not be changed or amended. After the bill’s enactment, only patent litigation related to the reference drug’s selected patent may trigger the 30-month stay on approval of a generic.
People & committees
Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL] · D–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text: CR S5000)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jul 1, 2026. 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 S.2620 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 S.2620 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 S.2620 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 S.2620 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.