News & Analysis as of

Bristol-Myers Squibb

BMS Challenges Momenta’s Standing In Federal Circuit Appeal of PTAB Decision

by Goodwin on

On December 5, 2017, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, 17-1694. Momenta is appealing a PTAB decision upholding the validity of BMS’s U.S. Patent No....more

District Courts Split over Proper Patent Venue for Hatch-Waxman Act Litigation

by Morgan Lewis on

There have been two interpretations of the “acts of infringement” language in the patent venue statute regarding ANDA submissions in Hatch-Waxman litigation....more

Spotlight on Upcoming Oral Arguments – December 2017

Ariosa appeals from a PTAB decision denying Ariosa’s IPR petition and upholding the validity of Illumina’s ’794 patent. In reaching its decision, the PTAB found that Ariosa failed to establish that the asserted reference...more

Commercial Division Dismisses Derivative Lawsuit After Board Rejects Shareholder Demand

The decision to bring a lawsuit on behalf of a corporation is entrusted to the corporation’s board of directors. A shareholder may not maintain a derivative lawsuit on behalf of a corporation without first making a demand on...more

More of What You Will See on Personal Jurisdiction Following BMS

by Reed Smith on

We wrote a few months ago about what you will see from the plaintiffs’ side as they try to evade the Supreme Court’s opinion in BMS v. Superior Court. That opinion has combined with Bauman to reset personal jurisdiction and...more

BMS and Nationwide Class Actions

by Reed Smith on

We have not been shy in predicting that Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, 137 S.Ct. 1773 (2017) (“BMS”), and Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S. Ct. 746 (2014) (“Bauman”), should restrain certain abusive class action...more

Sixth Circuit Reinforces "Stringent" Pleading Standard in False Claims Act Cases

by Jones Day on

The Sixth Circuit's recent decision in U.S. ex rel. Ibanez v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. reinforced Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b)'s requirement that plaintiffs plead fraud "with particularity" in False Claims Act cases....more

Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Mylan Pharms., Inc.

by Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Mylan Pharms., Inc., Civ. No. 17-379-LPS, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146372 (D. Del. Sept. 11, 2017) (Stark, J.)... Drug Product and U.S. Patent: Eliquis® (apixaban); U.S. Patents Nos....more

Anticipated Acts of Infringement May Establish Venue for Hatch-Waxman

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing venue in the context of Hatch-Waxman litigation, the US District Court for the District of Delaware held that venue is proper in Delaware if a generic drug company has permanent and continuous presence in Delaware...more

Recent Court Decisions on Venue Challenges Following TC Heartland

by Knobbe Martens on

The U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware recently handed down two important decisions on motions to transfer for improper venue. Judge Stark presided over both cases, transferring one case and ordering further...more

Federal Court of Appeal Applies Supreme Court’s Utility Test to SPRYCEL Patent

by Smart & Biggar on

In its first decision to consider the Supreme Court of Canada’s landmark decision in AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2017 SCC 36 [Esomeprazole](see our article here) on the utility requirement, the Federal Court of...more

Views on Venue -- Take Two: Did the District of Delaware Get It Right?

We recently reported that Chief Judge Stark of the District of Delaware interpreted the second prong of the patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), in Bristol-Myers Squibb Company v. Mylan because the first prong was no...more

Delaware Chief Judge Issues Guidelines for Venue in Patent Cases

by Morgan Lewis on

The court finds that some physical presence is required to satisfy the venue standard. On September 11, 2017, Chief Judge Leonard Stark of the US District Court for the District of Delaware handed down two decisions...more

Bristol-Meyer Squibb: The Death Of “Forum Shopping” Or “Same Old-Same Old”

by SmithAmundsen LLC on

The United States Supreme Court recently decided that “California courts lack specific jurisdiction to entertain the nonresidents’ claims.” Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, No. 16-466 (U.S. June 19,...more

The Luck of The Draw: A Strong Preemption Ruling from an Anticoagulant MDL

by Reed Smith on

We have offered our view that cases seeking to impose liability based on well-known risks found with an entire class of prescription medications tend to be weak. We think design defect claims usually are clearly preempted in...more

Post-BMS Personal Jurisdiction Cheat Sheet

by Reed Smith on

In the wake of the defense wins during the last Supreme Court term in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, 137 S.Ct. 1773 (2017) (“BMS”), and BNSF Ry. Co. v. Tyrell, 137 S. Ct. 1549 (2017), we’re retiring the personal...more

“We meant what we said” – U.S. Supreme Court Continues To Rein In Personal Jurisdiction

by McCarter & English, LLP on

This past term, the U.S. Supreme Court decided two matters in which it unequivocally held that state courts’ ability to assert personal jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants is limited under both general and specific...more

SCOTUS Finally Ends Litigation Tourism In Product Liability Suits

by Shipman & Goodwin LLP on

The United States Supreme Court fundamentally changed the practice of product liability litigation in the United States by finally doing away with the “litigation tourism” industry – the common practice of out-of-state...more

Breaking News - Bristol-Myers Squibb Slams The Door On Litigation Tourism

by Reed Smith on

The Supreme Court decided “the big one” today – and not to keep anyone in suspense [the big one is a major earthquake in California mass tort litigation], the result is that the California Supreme Court finding of personal...more

Bristol-Myers Squibb announces new pediatric subcutaneous administration option for Orencia® (abatacept)

by Goodwin on

We previously reported that the PTAB upheld the validity of Bristol-Myers Squibb’s ‘239 patent covering their rheumatoid arthritis agent Orencia® (abatacept). Since 2008, Orencia® has only been approved for use in patients 6...more

BNSF v. Tyrrell: Supreme Court Discourages Forum Shopping by Reaffirming Restrictive Daimler Test for General Jurisdiction

by Locke Lord LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court in BNSF Railway Co. v. Tyrrell, 2017 WL 2322834 (2017) made it harder for plaintiffs to sue in states where their alleged injury did not occur by reversing the Montana Supreme Court’s attempt to assert...more

Rx IP Update - April 2017

by Smart & Biggar on

Teva awarded section 8 damages regarding pregabalin and olanzapine - On March 30 and April 4, 2017, the Federal Court released two decisions on the merits under section 8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of...more

Supreme Court 4/25 Personal Jurisdiction Argument

by Reed Smith on

The other day, the United States Supreme Court heard argument in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, No. 16-466 (U.S. argued April 24, 2017) (“BMS”) (link to transcript). We’ve blogged many times about the issues in...more

Just How Predictable Must the Invention Be to Lose Patent Protection? Depends on the Inventive Concept

by Bennett Jones LLP on

Only a true invention can be patented; a patent claim to an invention is not valid if the invention was obvious. Assessing obviousness can be thought of as bridging the gap between two cliffs: on one side is the existing...more

Another Court Tackles Prescription Drug Design Defect

by Reed Smith on

If you have been following along for a while, then you have surely run across our posts making some combination of the following points: 1) design defect claims rarely make sense for a drug because changing the design in...more

75 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3
Cybersecurity

"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 using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*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. Or, sign up using your email address.