Innovation in Compliance: Unpacking Healthcare Compliance with Maria Villanueva
False Claims Act Insights - Physician, Refer Thyself: How Stark Law and FCA Intersect
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 190: Healthcare Tech and Human Resources with Shannon Frazier, HR Executive Director at Lenovo
Video: Braidwood v. Becerra – Challenging the Affordable Care Act’s Preventive Services Coverage Provision – Thought Leaders in Health Law
Greetings and Felicitations: The Future of Healthcare…Is Now: Part 3 – The Specifics of Managing Obesity
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 153: William Kenley, CEO, and Juana Slade, Chief Diversity Officer and Director of Language Services, AnMed Health
Greetings and Felicitations: The Future of Healthcare…Is Now: Part 2- Revolutionizing Healthcare: Personalized Medicine
Private Equity VS Real Estate Transactions | #6 What’s the Best Order to Sell?
Episode 152: Matt Littlejohn, CEO, MUSC Health Midlands
Private Equity VS Real Estate Transactions | #4 Optimizing Total Asset Value
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 151: Erin Ford, EVP & COO, and David Stefanich, Board Chair, SCBIO
Private Equity VS Real Estate Transactions | #3 Real Estate Valuations Explained
AGG Talks: Home Health & Hospice - Reimbursement Audits and Appeals
Podcast - Counsel That Cares - The Value of Value-Based Cancer Care
Episode 150 - Jane Pine Wood, Senior Vice President & Chief Legal Officer, BioReference
Podcast - The Latest on Antitrust and Non-Compete Agreements in Healthcare
Strategies to Manage Costs of Medical Care in a PA Workers’ Compensation Claim
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 149: Patrick Goodwill, CEO, Magnetic Insight
Podcast - Noteworthy Value-Based Care Mergers and Acquisitions Transactions
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 146: Ann Lewis, CEO, CareSouth
This Federal Circuit opinion addresses a district court’s decision granting plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction. Background - Plaintiff Natera, Inc. (“Natera”) and defendant NeoGenomics Laboratories, Inc....more
This chart summarizes the case name, presiding judge, drug, and patents-at-issue in all federal district court cases that are filed pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act. It also includes the same information for proceedings...more
This chart tracks the date, drug, reference-listed company, applicant, and indications of publicly available drug launches resulting from Abbreviated New Drug Applications and 505(b)(2) Applications....more
This chart summarizes the case name, drug, patents-in-suit, and publicly available terms for reported settlements in federal district court cases that are filed pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act....more
This chart tracks the date, drug, reference-listed company, and applicant of Abbreviated New Drug Applications and 505(b)(2) Applications receiving final approval by the FDA....more
In Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, the Supreme Court unanimously held that “[i]f a patent claims an entire class of processes, machines, manufactures, or compositions of matter, the patent specification must enable a person skilled in...more
(December 27, 2023) Natera Inc. succeeded in obtaining a preliminary injunction against NeoGenomics Laboratories, Inc.’s medical assay test. Natera’s ongoing federal lawsuit alleges that NeoGenomics’ product “RaDaR,” a tumor...more
The Situation: On December 8, 2023, the National Institute of Standards and Technology ("NIST") released a proposed framework for federal agencies regarding the exercise of the government's march-in rights for federally...more
In a recent precedential opinion, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated an infringement judgement against Mylan (Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. 2022-1889, Fed. Cir. Nov. 6,...more
IP rights can be vital to the success of medical device companies. Significant legislative changes governing some of these rights may be on the horizon. Senators Coons (Delaware), Durbin (Illinois), Hirono (Hawaii), and...more
On August 22, 2023, the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential decision holding that claims directed to deuterated analogs of ruxolitinib were unpatentable as obvious. Sun Pharm. Indus., Inc. v. Incyte Corp., No....more
Case Name: Amgen Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., Nos. 2022-1147, 2022-1149, 2022-1150, 2022-1151, 2023 WL 2994166 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 19, 2023) (Circuit Judges Lourie, Cunningham, and Stark presiding; Opinion by Lourie, J.) (Appeal from...more
Case Name: Vanda Pharms. Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., No. 2023-1247, 2023 WL 3335538 (Fed. Cir. May 10, 2023)(Circuit Judges Dyk, Bryson, and Prost presiding; Opinion by Dyk, J.) (Appeal from D. Del., Connolly, J.)....more
On May 15, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States denied Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.’s (“Teva”) petition for certiorari in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline, LLC, ending a nearly nine-year court...more
Amgen Inc. et al. v. Sanofi et al, No. 21-757 (S. Ct. May 18, 2023) The Supreme Court issued a long-awaited decision today concerning the enablement requirement found in Section 112 of the Patent Act. Specifically, the...more
The questions from the high court during oral argument at the end of March 2023 were fairly telling of the 9-0 ruling that came down yesterday in Amgen, Inc. v. Sanofi (No. 21-757). In fact, it did not come as much of a...more
This morning, the US Supreme Court issued its opinion in Amgen v. Sanofi, a closely watched case concerning patent law’s enablement requirement. Under that requirement, codified at 35 U.S.C. § 112(a), a patent specification...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
Case Name: Vanda Pharms. Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., Nos. 22-7528, 22-7529 (CCC), 2023 WL 1883357 (D.N.J. Feb. 10, 2023) (Cecchi, J.) - Drug Products and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Hetlioz® (tasimelteon); U.S. Patent No....more
Case Name: Exelixis, Inc. v. MSN Labs. Private Ltd., No. 19-2017-RGA-SRF, 2023 WL 315614 (Consol.) (D. Del. Jan. 19, 2023) (Andrews, J.) - Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Cabometyx® (cabozantinib (S)-malate); U.S....more
The Supreme Court heard arguments this week in Amgen v. Sanofi, the closely-watched case involving the enablement standard for patent claims, particularly as applied to functionally-defined genus claims. The question raised...more
Be careful of showing your claimed inventions at tradeshows. On February 15, 2023, the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) affirmed a summary judgment ruling that, by merely showcasing an embodying device at an industry event (the...more
Case Name: Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC v. Apotex Corp., C.A. No. 20-cv-804-RGA, 2022 WL 2643532 (D. Del. July 8, 2022) (Hall, J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Jevtana® (cabazitaxel); U.S. Patents Nos. 8,927,592 (“the ’592...more
A medical device patentee has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to save his design patent, related to an introducer sheath handle, from invalidity based on application of the “on-sale” bar, which prohibits patenting an invention...more
UNIFIED PATENT COURT - The Unified Patent Court (UPC) should become a reality in 2022 or in the first few months of 2023. The Protocol on Provisional Application (PPA) of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (AUPC)...more