News & Analysis as of

Generic Drugs Warner Chilcott

Robins Kaplan LLP

Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V. v. Warner Chilcott Co., LLC

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V. v. Warner Chilcott Co., LLC, No. 2016-2583, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 20441 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 19, 2017) (Circuit Judges Dyk, Linn, and Hughes presiding; Opinion by Hughes, J.) (Appeal from D....more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V. v. Warner Chilcott Co., LLC

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V. v. Warner Chilcott Co., LLC, Civ. No. 13-2088-GMS, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114419 (D. Del. Aug 26, 2016) (Sleet, J.) - Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: NuvaRing® (etonogestrel /...more

WilmerHale

3rd Circuit Weighs In On Product-Hopping

WilmerHale on

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

Troutman Pepper

Third Circuit Focuses on Relevant Product Market and Lack of Anticompetitive Conduct in Doryx Product-Hopping Case

Troutman Pepper on

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

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

Robins Kaplan LLP

Warner Chilcott Co., LLC v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Warner Chilcott Co., LLC v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., 2015-1588, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 4945 (Fed. Cir. March 18, 2016) (Circuit Judges Lourie, Dyk, and Hughes presiding; Opinion by Lourie, J.) (Appeal from D.N.J.,...more

Proskauer Rose LLP

The First Circuit Agrees that Non-Cash Reverse Payments Are Subject to Antitrust Scrutiny. Does the Loestrin Decision Point to...

Proskauer Rose LLP on

Recently, the First Circuit became the second federal appellate court interpreting the Supreme Court's landmark decision in FTC v. Actavis, Inc. to hold that non-cash "reverse payments" between pioneer and generic...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

1st Circuit Joins 3rd Circuit: Non-Cash Reverse Payments Subject to Antitrust Scrutiny

Courts continue to evaluate the degree to which “reverse payments” are permitted post-Actavis. In the latest of these decisions, issued on February 22, 2016, the First Circuit held that non-cash payments may run afoul of the...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Court Report - December 2015 #2

About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Warner Chilcott (US), LLC et al. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al. - 1:15-cv-00761; filed August 31, 2015 in...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Court Report - December 2015

About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. et al. v. Med-Pharmex, Inc. 3:15-cv-01905; filed August 28, 2015 in the Southern District of...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH v. Warner Chilcott Co.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH v. Warner Chilcott Co., LLC, 12-1032-GMS, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52061 (D. Del. Apr. 21, 2015) (Sleet, J.) - Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Lo Loestrin® Fe (norethindrone...more

11 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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide