Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/16pdf/15-1039_1b8e.pdf
Page Number: 23.0

Cite as:  582 U. S. ____ (2017) 

1 

BREYER, J., concurring 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

Nos. 15–1039 and 15–1195 
_________________ 

15–1039 

SANDOZ INC., PETITIONER 
v. 
AMGEN INC., ET AL. 

15–1195 

AMGEN INC., ET AL., PETITIONERS 
v. 
SANDOZ INC. 

ON WRITS OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT 

[June 12, 2017] 

JUSTICE BREYER, concurring. 
The Court’s interpretation of the statutory terms before
us is a reasonable interpretation, and I join its opinion.  In 
my  view,  Congress  implicitly  delegated  to  the  Food  and 
Drug  Administration  authority  to  interpret  those  same 
terms.  That being so, if that agency, after greater experi-
ence  administering  this  statute,  determines  that  a  differ-
ent  interpretation  would  better  serve  the  statute’s  objec-
tives,  it  may  well  have  authority  to  depart  from,  or  to 
modify, today’s interpretation, see National Cable & Tele-
communications  Assn.  v.  Brand  X  Internet  Services,  545 
U. S. 967, 982–984 (2005), though we need not now decide 
any such matter.