False Claims Act Insights - Are All Healthcare “Kickbacks” Subject to FCA Liability?
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 204: Accelerating Life Sciences Startups with James Chappell of SCbio
Podcast — Drug Pricing: How Are Payers Responding to the IRA?
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 203: Manufacturing Specialty Drugs for Rare Diseases in North Carolina with Paul Testa of Kyowa Kirin
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 201: SHL Medical’s Investment in the Carolinas with Kimberlee Steele of SHL Medical
The Future of Laboratory Testing Just Got a Little Clearer: FDA's Final Rule on LDTs – Diagnosing Health Care
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 195: Life Sciences and Healthcare Workforce Development with Dr. John Hauser of Gaston College
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 194: Workforce Development for the Life Sciences Industry with David Stefanich of Rymedi
FDA Releases Laboratory-Developed Tests Final Rule – Thought Leaders in Health Law
Changes in FDA, Cannabis Policies and AI Developments
340B Drug Pricing Program Compliance
Episode 185: America’s Bioeconomy with Sarah Glaven, White House Research Biologist
Episode 183: Site Development for Life Sciences Companies with Adam Bruns of Site Selection Magazine
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 171: Laura Gunter, President of the NC Life Sciences Organization
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 169: Shirley Paddock, Senior VP of Clinical Development, Syneos Health
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 168: Christine Harhaj, Senior Director of Advocacy & Strategic Alliances, PhRMA
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 167: Dr. Ehsan Samei & Dr. Susan Halabi, Triangle CERSI
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 165: Doug Edgeton, President and CEO of the North Carolina Biotechnology Center
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 163: David Ellison, Chief Data Scientist for Lenovo’s Infrastructure Solutions Group
Podcast: Direct Access Laboratory Testing - Future FDA Proposed Regulations on LDTs - Diagnosing Health Care
I. Introduction - No pharmaceutical antitrust decision has had more impact than the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, a decision which officially defined the term “reverse payment...more
As we continue to assess the ripple effects from the Supreme Court's denial of certiorari in GlaxoSmithKline v Teva Pharms USA (GSK v Teva), a recent decision by Judge Andrews in the U.S. District Court for the District of...more
Patent offices may reject a patent application with claims reciting using a composition to treat a disease, based on the requirement that the claimed treatment is not fully supported by the application. In the U.S., such...more
The Supreme Court of the United States has denied certiorari in the Teva v. GSK “skinny labeling” case, leaving intact the Federal Circuit’s August 2021 decision, which we summarized online here. In the article below, we...more
The Supreme Court is expected to consider Teva’s pending petition for certiorari in the highly anticipated GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. on May 11, 2023, a case that could carry enormous implications for the...more
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) spent the better part of a decade attacking the practice of innovator drug companies settling ANDA litigation by providing payments to generic applicants challenging the validity of Orange...more
This month, we highlight significant developments in June 2018, including a Supreme Court decision regarding the PTAB, a federal court affirmation in Impax Laboratories Inc. v. Lannett Holdings Inc., and new legislation...more
In 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered its decision in FTC v. Actavis, finding that although so-called reverse payment settlement agreements were not per se antitrust violations in cases brought against generic drug makers...more
Generic and branded pharma companies alike are waiting with baited breath to see if the U.S. Supreme Court will take up the issue of personal jurisdiction in Hatch-Waxman patent cases this term. After a broad ruling from the...more
Patent settlement agreements were traditionally deemed outside the purview of antitrust scrutiny unless the patent holder’s conduct fell outside the legitimate scope of the patent’s exclusionary power. This all changed when...more
Arnall Golden Gregory LLP's (AGG) Food and Drug Newsletter is a monthly update of legal and regulatory issues that affect the FDA-regulated community, including regular updates on legislative initiatives from AGG’s...more
Since the Supreme Court’s decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S.Ct. 746 (2014)—effectively limiting the reach of general jurisdiction to defendant’s “home” states of incorporation or principal place of business—generic drug...more
Recently, the First Circuit became the second federal appellate court interpreting the Supreme Court's landmark decision in FTC v. Actavis, Inc. to hold that non-cash "reverse payments" between pioneer and generic...more
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
Under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e), filing an Abbreviated Biologics License Application (aBLA)—like filing an Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA)— can be an act of patent infringement resulting in ‘artificial’ injury to a patentee....more
Last week, in Eli Lilly and Company v. Teva Parenteral Medicines, Inc., Judge Tanya Walton Pratt of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana determined that Eli Lilly and Company had shown by a...more
Addressing for the first time whether reverse settlement agreements involving non-cash consideration merit antitrust scrutiny, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reversed the district court, applying the...more
Two judges in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey have denied motions to dismiss for personal jurisdiction in Hatch-Waxman litigations based on the defendants’ compliance with New Jersey’s foreign...more
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
An emerging issue in Hatch-Waxman litigation – and potentially under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) – is the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S. Ct.746 (2014), on...more
In the watershed case of PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing, the United States Supreme Court determined that federal law preempts state law failure-to-warn claims against generic pharmaceutical manufacturers. More specifically, Mensing...more
In This Issue: - INTRODUCTION - WHAT ARE REVERSE PAYMENT SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS? ..The Basic Framework of Hatch-Waxman Litigation ..The Federal Trade Commission’s View of Reverse Payment Settlements and Its...more
Earlier this month, the Generic Pharmaceutical Association (GPhA) held a press conference to announce the release of a study of the effects of reverse settlement payment agreements in ANDA litigation. ...more
The Supreme Court on Monday declined to grant certiorari in Momenta Pharmaceuticals v. Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, a case involving a split in authority that has arisen among Federal Circuit judges regarding the scope of the...more
On June 17, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a decision that addressed a “reverse payment” settlement agreement between a brand-name pharmaceutical company (plaintiff patent holder) and multiple generic drug companies...more