{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03372243839169909, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0012970168612191958, 'mean_word_length': 5.078740157480315, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Will The Federal Circuit’s Eli Lilly V. Teva Decision Lead To Efforts To Abuse The Modification Provision Of The Hatch-Waxman Act?

[1] The Hatch-Waxman Act provides a mandatory thirty-month stay on the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) approval of an Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) when a patent infringement suit is filed. The Act includes a provision for a district court to shorten or extend the Act’s thirty-month stay on FDA approval if “either party to the action failed to reasonably cooperate in expediting the action” (hereinafter “the modification provision”). The federal district courts have on the whole been very conservative in their interpretation of the modification provision. The district courts have, to date, seldom exercised their power