News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Patents › Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

Large and Unjustified: Second Circuit Clarifies Pleading Requirements in Reverse Payments Cases

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP on

On May 13—and more than ten years after Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, the leading U.S. Supreme Court case on reverse payment settlements—the Second Circuit for the first time weighed in on whether (and how) antitrust...more

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

Clarity May Be Around the Corner for Antitrust Scrutiny of Reverse Payment Settlements

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP on

In the ten years since the Supreme Court ruled in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis that reverse payment settlements—or settlements where a patent holder pays an accused patent infringer cash or other consideration to end...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

FTC Prevails in Reverse Payment Case

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

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

Morrison & Foerster LLP

What Are the Top Hatch-Waxman and BPCIA Developments for October 2018?

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

This month we highlight a new law requiring notification to the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice of biosimilar litigation settlements and perhaps the end of a long-running Mylan venue dispute in Delaware....more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

The Effects of the Actavis Decision on Reverse Payment Settlement Agreements in ANDA cases -- Four Years After

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

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

Perkins Coie

Recent Court Cases Interpreting “Reverse Payments” Post-Actavis

Perkins Coie on

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

JAMS

IP Matters, Fall 2015

JAMS on

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

McDermott Will & Emery

ANDA Update - October 2015

McDermott Will & Emery on

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Federal Circuit Lifts Injunction Against Sandoz

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

Sandoz successfully (at least for now) has overcome conventional wisdom, the plain language of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) (or, at least those provisions regarding patent litigation) and Amgen...more

K&L Gates LLP

Third Circuit Says Actavis Not Limited to Cash

K&L Gates LLP on

In the first decision by a federal appeals court interpreting the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in FTC v. Actavis, the Third Circuit recently held in King Drug Co. of Florence v. SmithKline Beecham Corp. that so-called...more

Proskauer Rose LLP

First Federal Appellate Court Holds a NonCash Reverse Payment Subject to Antitrust Scrutiny: Is the Third Circuit's Decision in...

Proskauer Rose LLP on

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

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Advertising Law - May 2015 #4

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP on

SPECIAL FOCUS: The Impact of the Supreme Court’s Octane Fitness Decision on Lanham Act Litigation - For the second time in recent years, a Supreme Court decision in a patent case is having a major impact on Lanham Act...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

After Actavis: Crafting Pharmaceutical Settlements that Avoid Antitrust Scrutiny

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Last year’s Supreme Court decision in FTC v. Actavis cleared the way for more antitrust challenges to settlements between generic and branded pharmaceutical companies resolving Hatch-Waxman patent litigation. As a result,...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Jumping Into The Actavis Briar Patch — Insight Into How Courts May Structure Reverse Payment Antitrust Proceedings And The...

Robins Kaplan LLP on

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

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

FTC v. Actavis on Remand: A New Chapter

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

District Court refuses to grant renewed motion to dismiss based on Noerr-Pennington doctrine. In re AndroGel Antitrust Litigation (No. II), MDL No. 2084 (re Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc., No. 1:09-CV-955-TWT)...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

"Antitrust and Competition: Nonmerger Enforcement Activity Heats Up on Both Sides of the Atlantic"

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on

U.S. and European antitrust agencies had similar enforcement priorities last year, a trend we expect to continue in 2014. Nonmerger enforcement will continue to focus on intellectual property, financial services and...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Top Stories of 2013: #4 to #6

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

Reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its seventh annual list of top biotech/pharma patent stories. For 2013, we identified fourteen stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Antitrust Bulletin - Vol. 5, No. 1

Robins Kaplan LLP on

In this Issue: - New Developments - U.S. Supreme Court Will Decide Whether Patent Agreements That Postpone the Sale of Generic Drugs Violate Antitrust Laws - Direct Purchasers Have Standing to Bring Antitrust...more

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP

Supreme Court, in FTC v. Actavis, rejects the “scope of the patent” test, holding that antitrust law’s “rule of reason” analysis...

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP on

Patent rights and antitrust law contain inherently antagonistic policies: While antitrust law is aimed at preventing monopolies and promoting competition, patent law explicitly rewards inventors with a time-limited right to...more

K&L Gates LLP

Supreme Court Applies Rule of Reason in Antitrust Challenges to Reverse-Payment Patent Settlements

K&L Gates LLP on

One of the most controversial antitrust issues for the pharmaceutical industry during the last decade has been the treatment of patent settlements in which a patent-holding branded manufacturer made payments to its generic...more

Bracewell LLP

High Court Finds Antitrust Scrutiny Applies to Pay-for-Delay Settlements

Bracewell LLP on

On June 17, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) antitrust challenge to a reverse payment settlement agreement between drug manufacturers, otherwise known as a “pay-for-delay”...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

FTC v. Actavis: What Does It Mean for Reverse-Payment Settlements?

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

On June 17, 2013, the United States Supreme Court announced a rule that blurs the lines between antitrust and patent law in the context of Hatch-Waxman litigation....more

McDermott Will & Emery

“Reverse Payment” Settlements Subject to Greater Antitrust Scrutiny: Implications of Supreme Court FTC v. Actavis Ruling

McDermott Will & Emery on

By rejecting the “scope of the patent” test and holding that reverse payment patent settlements “can sometimes violate the antitrust laws,” the Supreme Court of the United States subjects such settlements to greater antitrust...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Supreme Court Applies Antitrust Scrutiny to ANDA Reverse Payment Settlement Agreements

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc., the Supreme Court held that reverse payment (“pay-for-delay”) settlement agreements made in the context of settling Hatch-Waxman ANDA litigation should be evaluated for antitrust...more

Troutman Pepper

Drug Company Patent Settlements Subject To Rule Of Reason Antitrust Scrutiny

Troutman Pepper on

This week, the Supreme Court announced that “reverse payment” settlements of patent litigation between branded and generic pharmaceutical companies are, when challenged in a subsequent antitrust case, to be judged under the...more

40 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2
Next »

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide