Civil Procedure Antitrust & Trade Regulation Intellectual Property

Read Civil Procedure updates, alerts, news, and legal analysis from leading lawyers and law firms:
News & Analysis as of

FTC Asserts That Its Failure to Object to a “Reverse Payment” Settlement Should Not Be Interpreted as Approval

On November 17, 2015, the FTC submitted an amicus brief to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in In re Effexor XR Antitrust Litigation, where the district court had dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims of antitrust violations...more

IP Matters, Fall 2015

Textile Copyright Cases Ripe for ADR - While normally focused on music and media matters, copyright lawyers in California have grown busy with something else: fabrics. Hundreds of textile copyright suits involving fabric...more

ITC Powerless to Block Importation of Infringing Digital Files

The Federal Circuit held that the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) could not block the import of infringing digital files because the ITC lacked jurisdiction. According to the Federal Circuit, the term “articles”...more

Federal Circuit panel decision 2-1 reverses U.S. International Trade Commission determination that it has authority to regulate...

In ClearCorrect v. ITC, issued on November 10, 2015, the Federal Circuit interpreted the term “articles” as used in Section 337 to be tangible, physical items. Accordingly, electronic transmissions were held to be outside the...more

9th Circuit Cannot Make Up Its Mind

In a drama that certainly has not seen its curtain drop, the 9th Circuit has changed its mind twice on the same issue in the same case during a 19 month span. This story began in 2011 when Multi Time Machine, Inc. (“MTM”), a...more

Accused Infringer Rides Antitrust Roller Coaster - Magnetar Technologies Corp. v. Intamin Ltd.

Addressing antitrust issues in connection with a dismissed patent infringement lawsuit, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a grant of summary judgment dismissing antitrust and malicious prosecution...more

ANDA Update - October 2015

Federal Circuit Interprets Statutory Requirements for Biosimilar Regulatory Pathway - Amgen Inc., v. Sandoz Inc., (Fed. Cir. July 21, 2015): In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...more

No Cash Compensation for Class of Amateur Student Athletes

In a class action brought under the Sherman Antitrust Act, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the NCAA eligibility regulations are subject to antitrust scrutiny. Applying the so-called Rule of Reason, the court held...more

Turing, Daraprim, and Refusals to Deal with Generic Manufacturers

Drug company Turing Pharmaceuticals made headlines recently when it reportedly raised the price of Daraprim, used commonly by AIDS patients to fight life-threatening infections, from $13.50 to $750 per tablet. Amidst...more

Apotex Accuses Amgen of Sham BPCIA Litigation

Amgen recently sued Apotex under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) over Apotex’s proposed biosimilar of Amgen’s Neulasta (pegfilgrastim), a long-lasting version of Neupogen. This is the first...more

Better Early than Never: SDNY Dismisses Lawsuit over Patent Settlement where Generics were Granted Early-Entry Licenses with...

On September 22, Judge Ronnie Abrams of the Southern District of New York dismissed an antitrust lawsuit against Takeda Pharmaceuticals and three generic drug manufacturers based on settlements they had reached regarding a...more

Australia High Court Rules Against Gene Patents

Colleagues in Australia have been spreading the bad news: The High Court of Australia followed the lead (?) of the U.S. Supreme Court and determined that Myriad cannot patent the isolated BRCA1 gene in Australia. Thanks to...more

MoFo IP Newsletter - October 2015

The Survey Says: Tiffany Is Not Generic for A Ring Setting - Last month, the Southern District of New York granted summary judgment to Tiffany & Co. on its trademark infringement claim against Costco Wholesale...more

28 U.S.C. § 1782: A Powerful Tool in Global Disputes

As the number and complexity of cross-border and multi-jurisdictional disputes increase, companies can use 28 U.S.C. § 1782 to obtain evidence from U.S.-based entities for use in those foreign proceedings. Specifically, §...more

"Shifting Burdens: Structuring a Rule of Reason in Reverse-Payment Cases"

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc. triggered a flurry of judicial activity in relation to pharmaceutical patent settlements allegedly involving reverse payments from patent...more

Business Litigation Report - August 2015

Extradition for U.S. Antitrust Crimes: An Anomaly or the New Normal? - In April 2014, Germany extradited Romano Pisciotti, an Italian national, to the United States to face criminal charges related to his alleged...more

Federal Circuit’s En Banc Suprema Ruling Confirms the ITC’s Authority to Exclude Imported Goods Used to Directly Infringe in the...

On August 10, 2015, the Federal Circuit held that under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, the International Trade Commission (ITC) could exclude from the United States imported goods that, after importation, are used in...more

Suprema, Inc. v. ITC: En Banc Federal Circuit Confirms ITC’s Jurisdiction to Exclude Articles Based on Induced Infringement

On August 10, 2015, the full US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its en banc opinion in Suprema, Inc. v. ITC, which overturned an earlier panel decision and confirmed, by a 6–4 vote, that the International...more

Federal Circuit Strengthens ITC's Authority to Police Importation

On August 10, 2015, the Federal Circuit, acting en banc, ruled that the International Trade Commission (ITC) has the authority to prevent importation of products based on claims for induced infringement where the predicate...more

FTC Commissioner Wright and D.C. Circuit Judge Ginsburg Criticize Second Circuit’s Actavis Ruling

We have been following developments in People of the State of New York v. Actavis, the New York Attorney General’s “product hopping” suit against Actavis and its subsidiary, Forest Laboratories LLC (together, “Actavis”). Now,...more

ITC Section 337 Update – August 2015

En Banc Federal Circuit Upholds The Commission’s Position In Suprema – On August 10, 2015, in an en banc Opinion written by Circuit Judge Reyna, the Federal Circuit upheld the Commission’s position in Suprema, Inc. v....more

ClearCorrect v. ITC: Federal Circuit Hears Argument in Case Which Will Decide Whether ITC Has Jurisdiction Over Digital Imports

On Tuesday, August 11, the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments in ClearCorrect v. International Trade Commission, a case that will decide whether the ITC has the power to exclude intangible items that are imported digitally...more

Federal Circuit authorizes ITC to bar imports that may or may not be used to infringe

On August 10, 2015, the Federal Circuit extended the reach of the ITC to cover accused articles that do not directly infringe when coming into the country through customs, but are later made or used to directly infringe a...more

Second Circuit Denies Petition for Actavis Rehearing

We have previously posted about the New York Attorney General’s “product hopping” suit against Actavis and its subsidiary, Forest Laboratories LLC (together, “Actavis”), including our analysis of the District Court’s opinion...more

Intellectual Property Alert: Suprema, Inc. v. ITC: ITC Can Exclude, Under Inducement Theory, Imported Products That Only Infringe...

On August 10, 2015, an en banc Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the International Trade Commission’s interpretation of Section 337 was reasonable and therefore that the ITC has the authority to exclude,...more

295 Results
View per page
Page: of 12

Follow Civil Procedure 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*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*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.