Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Antitrust & Trade Regulation

Read Intellectual Property Law updates, alerts, news, and legal analysis from leading lawyers and law firms:
News & Analysis as of

Pay-For-Delay In 2014: Courts Fill In The Actavis Gaps

A little more than one year ago, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis Inc. and affirmed that antitrust principles apply to reverse payment settlement agreements — those in which a brand-name drug...more

The FTC gets activist post-Actavis

In 2013, the FTC left its mark on the pharmaceutical industry when the Supreme Court ruled in FTC v. Actavis that settlement agreements for patent infringement suits between branded and generic drug companies are not immune...more

Will the Supreme Court Remove Brulotte’s Shadow Over Patent Licensing?

Fifty years ago, in Brulotte v. Thys Co., the U.S. Supreme Court held that the collection of royalties after a patent’s expiration constitutes per se patent misuse. Although criticized by scholars, antitrust agencies, and the...more

Preliminary Injunction Precludes Actavis from Pulling Current Version of Namenda off the Market

Yesterday, Judge Robert Sweet granted the New York Attorney General’s request to block Actavis and its New York-based subsidiary Forest Laboratories LLC from pulling Namenda, a dementia drug commonly used to treat...more

Development in Pharma Patent Settlement Lawsuit

In one of the first tests of the Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc. addressing the antitrust treatment of pharmaceutical patent settlements, a recent jury on Dec. 5, 2014, returned a...more

First Post-Actavis Jury Verdict Goes to Defendants on Causation Question

After six weeks of trial and two days of deliberation, the jury has returned its verdict in favor of the defendants in In re: Nexium. This trial began as a challenge to the allegedly anticompetitive effects of the settlements...more

Advocate General Wathelet in Huawei Technologies: Disappointing Opinion

Advocate General Wathelet’s disappointing Opinion in Huawei Technologies sets out a test that is divorced from reality. - The application of competition and antitrust law to standard essential patents (“SEPs”) is a...more

Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. TWi Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2014)

That it is more difficult today to be a patentee able to defend her patent rights than any time since the 1940's is nicely illustrated by the Federal Circuit's decision in Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. TWI Pharmaceuticals,...more

CAFC to Rehear Suprema: Disposition Could Have Significant Repercussions for ITC Jurisdiction

On February 5, 2015 the en banc Federal Circuit will hear oral argument in the matter of Suprema, Inc. v. ITC., Case No. 2012-1170 (Fed. Cir.). This rehearing reviews the controversial Federal Circuit opinion holding that “an...more

In re: Nexium: Judge Young Denies Defendants’ Motions for a Directed Verdict

Last week, the Nexium district court ruled on defendants’ motions seeking judgment as a matter of law. As we previously reported in several earlier posts, In re: Nexium is the first pay-for-delay case to go to trial since...more

ITC Section 337 Update – November 2014

ITC Trial Lawyers Association Annual Meeting: November 13, 2014 – ITCTLA held its Annual Meeting on November 13, in Commission Main Hearing Room. Highlights of the meeting, included Chairman Broadbent’s opening remarks...more

What’s Next for In re: Nexium: Defendants’ Motions for Directed Verdicts Likely to Turn on Sufficiency of Expert Testimony

As we previously reported, the In re: Nexium trial is the first pay-for-delay trial in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis decision. But if the Nexium defendants have it their way, plaintiffs’...more

Patent Litigation and Generic Drug Companies: How to Avoid Becoming an “Exceptional Case”

2013 brought generic drug companies increased financial and legal hurdles when it came to marketing their products in the U.S. First, substantial new GDUFA “user fees” got levied on generics for access to the FDA. Then, the...more

District Court Reluctantly Allows Tying Claims Against Oracle to Go Forward

Last Friday, Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal of the Northern District of California denied a motion by Oracle to dismiss three counterclaims based on a tying theory in Oracle America, Inc. v. Terix Computer Co. In doing so,...more

Federal Circuit Upholds ITC’s Authority to Enforce Consent Order Covering Third-Party Products

uPI Semiconductor Corp. v. U.S. International Trade Commission and Richtek Technology Corp. v. U.S. International Trade Commission - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in...more

The World in US Courts - Orrick's Quarterly Review of Decisions Applying US Law to Global Business and Cross-Border Activities

Fall 2014 - The Global law firm Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP takes great pride in announcing the Summer 2014 edition of The World in US Courts: Orrick’s Quarterly Review of Decisions Applying US Law To Global...more

Nexium District Court Takes Pioneering Approach to Preliminary Jury Charge

How does a court explain the complicated area of law at the intersection of patent settlements and antitrust law to a group of lay-jurors in the wake of Actavis? The district court’s approach to preliminary jury instructions...more

October 2014: Trademark Litigation Update

Supreme Court Opens the Door to More False Advertising Claims. In a unanimous decision, Lexmark International Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 1377 (2014), the Supreme Court held that a plaintiff...more

FTC v. Cephalon, Inc.

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: The issue in this case is not whether the validity of the ’516 patent should be litigated in the antitrust trial, but rather, how the court’s previous finding of invalidity and...more

Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Settles on Eve of Trial – Agrees to Cooperate with Plaintiffs

Much has happened since our last post on the Nexium “pay for delay” class action lawsuit. Jury selection began in the District of Massachusetts on Monday, October 20, 2014. The day prior, one of the generic drug makers, Dr....more

Legal FAQ: Section 337 Investigations Before the International Trade Commission

What types of intellectual property claims can be brought before the International Trade Commission? - The U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) investigates claims of unfair competition under Section 337 of the...more

ITC Section 337 Update – October 2014

Conference on Subpoena Practice in Section 337 Investigations – On October 14, 2014 (2:00 – 4:00 p.m.), a conference was held in the Commission’s Main Hearing Room on subpoena practice in Section 337 Investigations. The...more

Converse: Stomping Out Counterfeits through Int’l Trade Commission Proceedings

Earlier this week, Converse launched an all-out offensive to combat what it considers counterfeit and knock-off versions of its Chuck Taylor All-Star line of sneakers. Reports peg the number as at least 22 separate lawsuits...more

PTAB - Trulia and Zillow possible merger is not a sufficient basis for extending the 12 month period to complete the trial

In Trulia, Inc. v. Zillow, Inc., Trulia filed a petition seeking covered business method review of U.S. Patent No. 7,970,674 relating to automatically determining a current value for a real estate property. CBM2013-00056. On...more

Sham-Wow! Antitrust Liability May Attach to Sham Administrative Petitions

Addressing whether the “sham” exception to Noerr-Pennington immunity is limited to sham litigation in courts, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a lower court’s summary judgment of no antitrust...more

235 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 10

Follow Intellectual Property Updates on: