Hatch-Waxman

News & Analysis as of

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

Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2015)

The Hatch Waxman statute created a safe-harbor provision, found at 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1), that allows ANDA filers and others to practice patented inventions without fear of infringement liability, provided the acts are...more

Lessons in Personal Jurisdiction for BPCIA Litigants after the Supreme Court’s decision in Daimler

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

Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement of a Disclaimed Patent Warranted in Hatch-Waxman - Apotex Inc. v. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.

Addressing the issue of subject matter jurisdiction in Hatch-Waxman litigation, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s dismissal for lack of case or controversy of an action seeking...more

AstraZeneca LP v. Breath Ltd.

Case Name: AstraZeneca LP v. Breath Ltd., Civ. No. 08-1512 (RMB/AMD), 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17687 (D.N.J. Feb. 13, 2015) (Bumb, J.). Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Pulmicort Respules® (budesonide inhalation...more

Use of “Antithesis” of Claim Element Does Not Bar Application of Doctrine of Equivalents - Cadence Pharms. Inc. v. Exela Pharma...

In a Hatch-Waxman case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the use of a claimed step, characterized as the “antithesis” of a limitation in the asserted claim, nonetheless satisfied that limitation...more

Otsuka Pharm. Co., Ltd. v. Mylan Inc.

Case Name: Otsuka Pharm. Co., Ltd. v. Mylan Inc., No. 14-4508 (JBS/KMW), 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35679 (D.N.J. Mar. 23, 2015) (Simandle, C.J.) . Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Abilify® (aripiprazole); U.S. Patents...more

The FDA Gets an EARful on Label Changes

We’ve blogged several times about the FDA’s pending proposal to gut preemption with respect to generic drugs, and that proposal’s numerous flaws. We have been remiss, however, in not mentioning the industry’s 2014...more

Amgen v. Sandoz Update -- BIO Files an Amicus Brief at the Federal Circuit

On March 19, 2015, U.S. District Judge Seeborg of the Northern District of California denied a motion for a preliminary injunction filed by Amgen to prevent the imminent launch by Sandoz of a biosimilar version of NEUPOGEN®...more

Amgen Receives No Help from the FDA -- A Biosimilar Update

Near the end of last month, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") denied a citizen petition filed by Amgen in which it requested that action be taken to ensure that biosimilar applicants comply with the disclosure and...more

Federal Circuit Addresses Damages in the Hatch-Waxman Context

On April 7, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its decision in Astrazeneca AB v. Apotex Corp., No. 2014-1221, affirming an award of a reasonable royalty of 50% in a case arising from the...more

Apotex Inc. v. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2015)

Can a Federal district court ever have subject-matter jurisdiction to hear a declaratory judgment action of non-infringement for a disclaimed patent? Of course, the Federal Circuit explained this week in the Apotex Inc. v....more

Senju Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. v. Lupin Ltd. (Fed. Cir. 2015)

Senju PharmaceuticalEarlier this month, the Federal Circuit affirmed a District Court judgment of obviousness in ANDA litigation under the Hatch Waxman Act having a long provenance of earlier litigation, in Senju...more

New Developments in Hatch-Waxman Personal Jurisdiction Cases

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana joined the District of Delaware and the Eastern District of Texas in finding specific jurisdiction based on receipt of a Paragraph IV Notice Letter. See...more

Court Denies Generic Drug Manufacturer’s Motion to Dismiss Hatch-Waxman Patent Infringement Action on Jurisdiction Grounds

On March 12, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana joined the District of Delaware and Eastern District of Texas as the first courts to consider a generic drug manufacturer’s motion to dismiss...more

Biosimilars in the US: still at the starting line?

Congress enacted the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) in 2009 to create a framework for the introduction of biosimilar and interchangeable drugs into the US market. Like the predecessor Hatch-Waxman Act,...more

FDA Approves Biosimilar Agent Zarxio: Dawn of a New Era in Pharmaceutical Therapy and Product Liability Law

The FDA's approval on March 6, 2015, of Sandoz's Zarxio (filgrastim-sndz) is a momentous occasion for pharmaceutical therapy and product liability law in the United States. Catching up with Europe (where Sandoz's identical...more

PTAB Rejects Attempts to Expand the Scope of CBM Review - Par Pharm., Inc. v. Jazz Pharm., Inc.

Addressing for the first time a request for covered business method (CBM) review by a generic drug maker facing an infringement suit under the Hatch-Waxman Act, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO’s) Patent Trial and...more

Direct Purchasers and End Payors Accuse Brand Pharma of Delaying Generic Entry

Americans want access to inexpensive pharmaceutical drugs. This demand must be balanced with the fact that brand-name, innovator pharmaceutical companies typically invest tremendous resources to research and develop new...more

PTAB Update -- Biopharmaceutical Edition

Earlier this week, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board ("PTAB" or "Board") handed down what is thought to be the first set of inter partes review ("IPR") Final Written Decisions ("FWDs") in the biopharmaceutical industry. And...more

The Iron Law of Unintended Consequences - (with apologies to Robert Michels)

It is a certainty that no matter what action is taken (by an individual, a group, or especially a legislative body) that there will be unintended consequences. It is also true that those unintended consequences, like the...more

Will Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. Change Patent Litigation?

On January 20, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its first patent decision of the current term, rejecting the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s long-standing practice of reviewing district court patent...more

Biosimilars Update

Novartis came one step closer to becoming the first company to offer a biosimilar drug for sale in the United States. Last month, an independent panel voted 14-0 to recommend FDA approval of Sandoz’s (Novartis’ generics...more

Recent Developments in Exercising Personal Jurisdiction in Hatch-Waxman Cases

In This Issue: - I. Traditional Use of General Jurisdiction in Hatch-Waxman Cases - II. Amenability to General Jurisdiction May Be Waning - III. Freedom from Jurisdiction Could Be An Advantage -...more

Practice Considerations Post Teva v. Sandoz

In Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 13-854, slip op. 574 U.S. __ (2015), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that underlying factual issues resolved while formally construing a disputed patent claim term at the...more

82 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, 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.
×