News & Analysis as of

Antitrust Violations › Generic Drugs › Antitrust Litigation

A&O Shearman

District Court Of Connecticut Largely Denies Generic Drug Manufacturers’ “Unusual” Dismissal Motion Targeting Specific Types Of...

A&O Shearman on

On November 12, 2024, Judge Michael P. Shea of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut granted in part and denied in part a joint motion to dismiss submitted by thirty-six defendant drug manufacturers...more

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

Jury Finds Gilead and Teva Did Not Engage in an Anticompetitive Pay-for-Delay Scheme for HIV Drugs

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati on

On June 30, 2023, a jury in the Northern District of California found Gilead and Teva not liable in a trial accusing the companies of engaging in an illegal reverse payment to delay generic versions of two HIV drugs, Truvada...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

An Analysis of a Failed Biosimilar Antitrust Class Action

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

On June 10th, Judge Manish S. Shah, U.S. District Court Judge for the Northern District of Illinois, dismissed (without prejudice) a class action lawsuit against AbbVie and AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd. by consumer groups, drug...more

The Volkov Law Group

DOJ Catches Big Fish in Generic Pharmaceutical Criminal Antitrust Investigation

The Volkov Law Group on

The Justice Department’s Antitrust Division announced a major guilty plea with Sandoz, Inc., in its expanding criminal investigation of the generic pharmaceutical industry....more

Cozen O'Connor

First Circuit Permits Antitrust Claims for Improperly Listing a Device Patent on the FDA’s Orange Book to Move Forward

Cozen O'Connor on

In a holding that could significantly broaden the antitrust inquiry in the context of the Hatch-Waxman regulatory scheme, on February 13, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued an opinion that may have...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

2019 Pharmaceutical Antitrust Round-Up: A Year in Pay for Delay [Part 2]

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP on

Yesterday we discussed 2019’s most significant developments in challenges to reverse-payment settlements. Today we continue our analysis of recent trends in pharmaceutical antitrust actions with a discussion of cases...more

Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley

United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation – January 2019 Hearing Session Preview

Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley on

The next hearing session of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) is scheduled for January 31, 2019 in Miami, Florida. Six matters are set for oral argument to consider motions to transfer each...more

Robinson+Cole Class Actions Insider

Class Certification Improper Where 10% of Class Members Uninjured, Explains the First Circuit

Robinson+Cole Class Actions Insider on

The First Circuit recently addressed an issue of broad significance in class action law. It explained how a class cannot be certified when there are more than a small number of uninjured class members, and how a defendant...more

A&O Shearman

Reverse Payment Patent Settlements in the Pharmaceutical Industry: A Year in Review

A&O Shearman on

This past year has seen renewed challenges to reverse payment settlement agreements in the pharmaceutical industry. Since the Supreme Court’s Actavis decision in mid-2013, potentially anti-competitive agreements are...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Sovereign Immunity for State Plaintiffs in Antitrust Class Actions?

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP on

The Third Circuit recently denied a petition for rehearing en banc a panel’s earlier decision in the In re Flonase Antitrust Litigation. In that case, the panel decision addressed the degree to which class settlements can...more

Pierce Atwood LLP

In a Groundbreaking Decision, Third Circuit Provides Framework for Evaluating Numerosity

Pierce Atwood LLP on

One of the least disputed elements of class certification is Rule 23(a)(1) numerosity, and so there is relatively little analysis from the courts about it. Last month, however, a divided panel of the Third Circuit provided a...more

Knobbe Martens

Third Circuit Upholds Dismissal of Doryx ‘Product Hopping’ Suit

Knobbe Martens on

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

Carlton Fields

Third Circuit Creates Framework for Analyzing Numerosity

Carlton Fields on

The Third Circuit recently vacated class certification, granted by the Eastern District of Pennsylvania after nearly a decade of litigation, in an antitrust case alleging that a pharmaceutical company entered into agreements...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

District Court Narrowly Defines the Relevant Market in Post-Actavis Pay-For-Delay Suit

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP on

On August 8, the District of Connecticut issued a noteworthy ruling on how to approach defining the relevant market definition in a pay-for-delay suit. In In re Aggrenox Antitrust Litigation, 3:14-md-02516 (D. Conn.), three...more

14 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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