Antitrust & Trade Regulation Science, Computers & Technology Intellectual Property

Read Antitrust & Trade Regulation updates, alerts, news, and legal analysis from leading lawyers and law firms:
News & Analysis as of

ANDA Update - July 2015

Supreme Court Holds Good Faith Belief of Patent Invalidity Is Not a Defense to Induced Infringement - Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. (Supr. Ct. May 26, 2015): Pharmaceutical patents commonly include...more

Northern District of California Upholds Assignment of Antitrust Claims to Indirect Purchasers

Portions of a reverse payment suit against Endo Pharmaceuticals and others were recently dismissed by Judge William H. Orrick of the Northern District of California. The case was brought by plaintiffs who allege that a...more

The Court of Justice’s Preliminary Ruling in Huawei v. ZTE: The Final Word?

The application of competition law to standard essential patents (SEPs) has been the subject of significant debate. The latest instalment was provided by the Court of Justice on 16 July 2015 with its much-anticipated...more

Huawei v ZTE - CJEU Landmark Decision Provides New Ground Rules for Asserting Standard-Essential Patents in Europe

In a landmark decision issued on July 16, 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) provided new guidelines on how patent infringement courts in Europe should deal with patent proprietors seeking injunctions or...more

United States and Canada Respond to ICANN’s Concerns over the “.sucks” Domain

In April 2015, the General Counsel of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (“ICANN”) sent a letter to the United States’ Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC”) and Canada’s Office of Consumer Affairs (the...more

First Federal Appellate Court Holds a NonCash Reverse Payment Subject to Antitrust Scrutiny: Is the Third Circuit's Decision in...

Recently, the Third Circuit issued the first federal appellate decision interpreting the Supreme Court's landmark decision in FTC v. Actavis, Inc.[1], potentially greatly expanding the scope of settling parties in reverse...more

Third Circuit Allows Pay-For-Delay Suit Despite No Cash Payment

On June 26, 2015, the Third Circuit extended Actavis to non-cash settlements and held that Actavis can cover a no-AG agreement – “a settlement in which the patentee drug manufacturer agrees to relinquish its right to produce...more

Reforming Trade Secret Protections in Japan

Theft of corporate trade secrets continues to dominate the headlines as news abounds of stories ranging from crippling cyber-attacks exposing confidential data to employees stealing trade secrets to share with competitors. ...more

King Drug Co. of Florence, Inc. v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. (3rd Cir. 2015)

Ever since the Supreme Court's decision in FTC v. Actavis in 2013, courts (predominantly district courts) have grappled with the scope of the decision. It was evident that the presence of a large cash payment from the...more

Expanded HSR Antitrust Reporting for Pharma Licensing Deals Is Here to Stay

On June 9, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, in its ruling in Pharm. Research & Mfrs. of Am. v. FTC, upheld the FTC's expansion of HSR reporting requirements for pharmaceutical companies, and solidified...more

Cephalon and Teva's $1.2 Billion Consent Order with the FTC: Is it Really a Harbinger of Things to Come?

On June 17, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania approved a consent order (the “Consent Order”) between the Federal Trade Commission and defendants Cephalon, Inc. and its parent, Teva...more

Your Drug Patent Rights Transfer May Be Reportable, Court of Appeals Confirms

On Nov. 6, 2013, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC or Commission) modified its Hart-Scott-Rodino Act (HSR) rules to clarify that transfers of patent rights within the pharmaceutical industry constitute potentially reportable...more

Federal Appeals Court Upholds FTC HSR Rule on Pharma Patent Licenses

Background – the HSR Act: Under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (the HSR Act), acquisitions of voting securities, assets and other commercial interests which exceed certain monetary thresholds...more

Is the Competition Bureau Targeting You? New IP Enforcement Guidelines

On June 9, 2015, the Canadian Competition Bureau released updated draft Intellectual Property Enforcement Guidelines (IPEGs) for public comment. The comment period is open until August 10, 2015. It is the third publication of...more

Canadian Competition Bureau Releases New Draft IP Enforcement Guidelines for Comment

On June 9, 2015, the Canadian Competition Bureau (Bureau) released its draft Intellectual Property Enforcement Guidelines (Guidelines) for public comment. The Guidelines set out how the Bureau will assess conduct concerning...more

Business Litigation Report - May 2015

In This Issue: - Main Article: ..Patent Infringement in the Digital Age: How a Dispute About Tooth Aligners Led to a Fight About the ITC’s Jurisdiction over Electronic Transmissions - Noted With...more

REMS and Antitrust: Latest Litigation Lessons

Brand name pharmaceutical companies have long stood in the way of generic pharmaceuticals entering the market. To keep generics at bay, brands have used a variety tactics, including ultimately unlawful ones like fraudulently...more

Federal Trade Commission Continues March “to Set a Standard for the Industry” with Cephalon Settlement

On May 28, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) announced it had reached a $1.2 billion settlement with Teva Pharmaceuticals, which acquired Cephalon in 2012, over reverse payment for its narcolepsy drug, Provigil. The...more

Second Circuit Becomes First Court of Appeals to Address Pharmaceutical “Product Hopping” Under Antitrust Laws in Decision Barring...

Few courts have addressed antitrust challenges to pharmaceutical “product hopping,” i.e., the practice of shifting customers from a drug nearing the end of its patent protection to a modified version that is covered by newer...more

FTC’s $1.2 Billion Disgorgement Settlement With Cephalon: Heightened Scrutiny of Hatch-Waxman Settlements

On May 28, 2015, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced the settlement of its 2008 lawsuit against Cephalon, Inc. (now owned by Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd.), which alleged that Cephalon had made “reverse...more

Teva Agrees to Pay $1.2 Billion in FTC’s Pay-For-Delay Suit Against Cephalon

Recently, the FTC announced that it reached a settlement in its pay-for-delay lawsuit, FTC v. Cephalon Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, with Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries, Ltd.,...more

FTC and Cephalon Ink $1.2 Billion Settlement in Provigil "Pay-for-Delay" Litigation

On May 28, 2015, the FTC announced that it settled its longstanding antitrust suit against Cephalon, Inc., which is now owned by Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd. The FTC's suit alleged that Cephalon unlawfully protected...more

California Supreme Court Details Antitrust Analysis of "Reverse Payment" Patent Settlements

Last week, in In re Cipro Cases I & II, Case No. S198616, the Supreme Court of California adopted the United States Supreme Court's application of the Rule of Reason to the antitrust analysis of so-called "reverse payment"...more

California Supreme Court Delineates a Structured Rule of Reason Analysis for Evaluating Reverse Payment or Pay-for-Delay...

On May 7, 2015, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in In re Cipro Cases I & II, Case No. S198616 (May 7, 2015) (Cipro). Cipro holds that reverse payment settlements can be challenged under...more

Following Actavis, California Supreme Court Crafts “Structured Rule of Reason” Test for Evaluating Pay-for-Delay Settlements

Last Thursday the Supreme Court of California decided In re Cipro Cases I & II, No. S198616 (Cal. May 7, 2015), holding that reverse payment, or “pay-for-delay,” settlements can be challenged as unreasonable restraints on...more

359 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 15

Follow Antitrust & Trade Regulation Updates on:

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×