UPDATED 7/7/2016: In response to Hospira's letter to the Court, Amgen has submitted a letter of its own stating that "Hospira understates the significance of the Apotex decision" and that "the Court should deny Hospira's Motion to Dismiss." Amgen writes: "[A]lthough the court [in Apotex ] did not use the words 'private right of action,' its decision compels the conclusion that the BPCIA vests the reference product sponsor with a private right of action to obtain injunctive relief to enforce the commercial notice provision of paragraph 8(A)." Amgen further states in the letter that the Federal Circuit "specifically rejected" Hospira's other arguments in support of its Motion to Dismiss—namely, that because it engaged in the patent dance (though Amgen continues to dispute whether Hospira's disclosure was sufficient under the first step of the dance) the notice requirement is not mandatory in this case, and that ( l )(9)(B) provides the sole remedy to Amgen for a refusal to provide notice under (8)(A).