Brand-name pharmaceutical companies employ a variety of strategies to preserve and extend their branded drug products’ monopolies. Challenges by generic drug manufacturers and consumers to those efforts as allegedly...more
In a recent decision denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss, Judge Mitchell Goldberg of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania allowed the manufacturer of a generic version of Suboxone to proceed upon an interesting theory...more
On-Sale Bar Is No Bar for Selling Manufacturing Services to the Inventor - Addressing what constitutes an invalidating “sale” under § 102(b), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sitting en banc affirmed the...more
On Sept. 28, 2016, in Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Warner Chilcott Public Limited Co. (Doryx), the Third Circuit affirmed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment rejecting antitrust claims brought against Warner Chilcott...more
On September 28, 2016, the Third Circuit issued an opinion in Mylan v. Warner Chilcott, upholding the Eastern District of Pennsylvania’s holding on summary judgement that Defendants’ “product hopping” conduct did not violate...more
To prevail in a product-hopping case, a plaintiff must be prepared to establish both monopoly power and anticompetitive effects. On September 28, a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit...more
On September 28, 2016, in Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Warner Chilcott Public Limited Co. (Doryx), the Third Circuit affirmed the lower court's grant of summary judgment against antitrust claims by generic manufacturer Mylan...more
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed an antitrust complaint this week against Endo Pharmaceuticals and several generic companies, alleging that these companies entered into anticompetitive “reverse payment” settlements of...more
We have been following developments in People of the State of New York v. Actavis, the New York Attorney General’s “product hopping” suit against Actavis and its subsidiary, Forest Laboratories LLC (together, “Actavis”). Now,...more
We have previously posted about the New York Attorney General’s “product hopping” suit against Actavis and its subsidiary, Forest Laboratories LLC (together, “Actavis”), including our analysis of the District Court’s opinion...more
As the first court of appeals to address the issue of product hopping, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of a preliminary injunction, finding that product hopping is...more
Recent antitrust challenges to pharmaceutical companies' efforts to transition patients from drugs nearing the end of their patent life to next-generation drugs have increased the risk of pursuing such "product hopping"...more
Brand name pharmaceutical companies have long stood in the way of generic pharmaceuticals entering the market. To keep generics at bay, brands have used a variety tactics, including ultimately unlawful ones like fraudulently...more
On May 22, 2015, in a much-watched case, the Second Circuit upheld a preliminary injunction against Actavis PLC and its wholly owned subsidiary, Forest Laboratories, LLC (collectively “Actavis” or “Forest”), finding that...more
A recent summary judgment opinion from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania breaks new ground in the developing antitrust law on “product hopping” claims. “Product hopping” refers to the practice of changing the form or...more
A pharmaceutical firm’s ability to efficiently produce and promote a better treatment for Alzheimer’s disease lies at the center of an antitrust lawsuit pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. In...more
On January 6, 2015, the Second Circuit granted defendants’ motion for an expedited appeal but denied their motion for a stay in New York v. Actavis PLC, 14-4624 (2d Cir. Jan. 6, 2015). Defendants are manufacturers of...more
Last week, we briefly reported on the injunction granted by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in the New York Attorney General’s “product hopping” suit against Actavis and its subsidiary, Forest...more
Traditionally, plaintiffs asserting claims under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act allege the existence of one or more product markets relevant to the defendants’ anticompetitive conduct and the defendants’ shares of those...more
We’ve previously discussed antitrust claims related to “product hopping”—allegations that pharmaceutical manufacturers have reformulated or otherwise altered their products to prevent automatic generic substitution. Earlier...more
On September 15, 2014, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman filed an anti-trust lawsuit against the specialty pharmaceutical company Forest Laboratories and its new owner, Actavis. In the suit, Schneiderman alleges the...more
Previously, we discussed a recent lawsuit that alleged “product hopping” by a brand pharmaceutical manufacturer as part of a broader pay-for-delay claim. On Monday, the New York Attorney General filed a suit in the U.S....more