WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

AB 208

Relating to: an income and franchise tax exemption for broadband expansion grants and for federal high-cost program funding for broadband expansion. (FE)

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Dave Armstrong and 23 co-sponsors

AB 208 lets patent holders block nonconforming use of federally reviewed products by certain Nevada government entities, with limited exceptions like informed consent.

Assembly Substitute Amendment 1 offered by Representative Summerfield
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · AB 208

AB 208 (BDR 19‑737) — Summary and Key Points

Sponsor: Assemblymember Steve Yeager
Subject: Restricts the use of certain patented or federally reviewed products by governmental and government‑funded entities (Nevada)
Introduced: Feb 3, 2025 (prefiled); First read Jan 8, 2025
Latest status: No further action taken as of 2025‑06‑03

Purpose / Intent

AB 208 seeks to limit how certain public bodies use products that are (or ever were) patented or that are subject to federal review (e.g., FDA/USDA approved or pending). The bill’s stated aim is to protect both vulnerable individuals in government care from potentially harmful nonconforming uses and to protect the proprietary/approved uses asserted by patent holders, manufacturers or distributors.

Key provisions

  • Prohibits a covered governmental or government‑funded entity from using, providing, or dispensing a “federally reviewed product” in a manner that:
    • Contradicts the product’s terms of use established by the patent holder, manufacturer or distributor; or
    • Is inconsistent with written directions, labels, or packaging; or
    • Exceeds the product’s approved federal uses (when applicable).
  • Defines “federally reviewed product” to include products currently or previously patented by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office and products reviewed/approved (or pending) by the U.S. FDA or U.S. Department of Agriculture.
  • Notice-and‑objection process:
    • A covered entity may seek to use/provide/dispense a product nonconformingly by sending written notice to the patent holder and manufacturer/distributor identifying the product and planned use.
    • If no objection is received within 30 days, the covered entity may proceed.
    • A patent holder, manufacturer or distributor may object in writing; upon receipt of a valid objection the covered entity must cease and desist from the specified use. Objections may later be withdrawn.
  • Exception for informed consent:
    • As amended, a covered entity may provide/dispense a product for nonconforming use to a resident of a mental health facility or place of confinement if that resident gives informed consent; in that case the notice requirement need not be provided to patent holders/manufacturers.
  • Medicaid/federal funding coordination:
    • Amendments add provisions directing the Division for Medicaid to apply the statute to the extent permitted by federal law and permit coordination to obtain products from licensed locations outside covered facilities if Medicaid coverage or payment is lost, to avoid interruptions in care.

Who is covered / affected

  • Covered entities (as narrowed by amendments):
    • Governmental entities that operate mental health centers (NRS 433.144), facilities providing mental health services (NRS 433.233), or community correctional centers / conservation camps / minimum security facilities / other places of confinement (NRS 209.065, 209.071).
    • Government‑funded entities that received ≥50% of operating budget from government sources in the previous year and that maintain contracts with the above mental health or confinement facilities.
  • Stakeholders affected:
    • State and local agencies operating or contracting with mental‑health and correctional facilities
    • Residents/patients in those facilities
    • Manufacturers, patent holders and distributors of covered products (gain formal objection route)
    • Healthcare providers and clinical staff (may be constrained in prescribing/dispensing practices, especially for non‑label/off‑label uses)

Procedural history / timeline highlights

  • Assembly: Passed third reading 3/20/2025 (Ayes 53, Noes 17).
  • Referred to the Senate and assigned to committees; amendments adopted (Assembly Amendment No. 531; First Reprint issued with amendments on 4/18/2025).
  • Referred to Committee on B. & F. R. (Budget & Fiscal Review) 4/2/2025.
  • As of 2025‑06‑03: No further action taken.

Fiscal impact

  • Bill documents note: “Effect on Local Government: May have Fiscal Impact. Effect on the State: Yes.” (no detailed estimate provided).

Noted concerns / stakeholder input

  • Nevada Psychiatric Association (NPA) submitted opposition: raised risks that the bill (as originally drafted) could restrict off‑label prescribing and impede clinical judgment, delay access to necessary treatments for Medicaid and other public program beneficiaries, and pose adverse public‑health outcomes. NPA urged an explicit medical‑practice exemption; later amendments added an informed‑consent carve‑out and Medicaid coordination language to address some concerns.

Practical effect

If enacted as amended, AB 208 would create a statutory framework that gives patent holders/manufacturers a formal mechanism to block specified nonconforming uses of patented or federally reviewed products by covered public entities (primarily mental‑health and correctional institutions), while providing limited exceptions (informed consent; limited Medicaid/federal‑funding coordination). The law could change prescribing, dispensing and procurement practices within affected government and government‑funded settings and may create administrative responsibilities (notice, tracking objections, alternative sourcing).

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.