Business-to-business contracts often concern trade secrets. Contracts such as NDAs, joint development agreements, license agreements, vendor agreements, and other commercial agreements commonly contain restrictive covenants...more
Called upon by the Ninth Circuit in Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc. to answer two key questions concerning the validity of a settlement provision requiring a party’s termination of a collaboration agreement with a...more
In Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc., S256927, 2020 WL 4432623 (Cal. Aug. 3, 2020) (“Ixchel Pharma”), the Supreme Court of California clarified two points: (1) that to state a claim for interference with an at-will contract...more
In Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc., the court addresses “an important question of California law, potentially affecting all contracts in California that in some way restrain a contracting party from engaging in a...more
The California Supreme Court in the 2008 case, Edwards v. Arthur Andersen LLP, ruled that a provision in an employment agreement that prevented an employee from competing with his former employer following the termination of...more
The most powerful tool capable of invalidating competitive restraints under California law is Business and Professions Code section 16600. That statute states that “[e]very contract by which anyone is restrained from...more
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
A sweeping new opinion from the California Supreme Court revives California Cartwright Act challenges to pay-for-delay pharmaceutical patent settlements. In re Cipro Cases I & II, (Case No. S198616, Slip Op. May 7, 2015). A...more
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
The California Supreme Court issued a decision today in the Cipro antitrust cases, concluding that the analysis set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in FTC v. Actavis applies to alleged “pay-for-delay” pharmaceutical patent...more