News & Analysis as of

Patents Anti-Competitive Generic Drugs

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Circuit Says Proper Orange Book-Listed Patent Must Claim Active Ingredient

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals of New York, LLC, the Federal Circuit jumped on the bandwagon of scrutinizing the types of patents that can be listed in the Food & Drug...more

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

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

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

A&O Shearman

Beyond “pay-for-delay” – the EU-Commission’s investigation into patent filing practices and communication measures

A&O Shearman on

On 4 March 2021, the European Commission (Commission) opened a formal investigation into alleged anti-competitive conduct by the pharmaceutical company Teva. The Commission suspects Teva of having deployed a strategy with the...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Fourth Circuit Breathes New Life into Monopolization Suit

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit revived an antitrust suit alleging that a pharmaceutical manufacturer illegally maintained its monopoly for its innovator drug by precluding competition beyond the expiration...more

White & Case LLP

Court of Justice ruling in Paroxetine

White & Case LLP on

The European Court of Justice's ruling in Paroxetine, handed down in record time just before Brexit, confirms the narrow interpretation of restrictions by object given in other recent cases. It also clarified certain issues...more

Hogan Lovells

The Court of Justice of the European Union provides clarifications on the assessment under competition law of pay-for-delay deals...

Hogan Lovells on

On 30 January 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued its decision on a request for preliminary ruling submitted by the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) in a case concerning the long-standing...more

WilmerHale

Unprecedented State Law on Pharmaceutical “Reverse Payments” Goes Into Effect

WilmerHale on

A new California law, Preserving Access to Affordable Drugs, AB-824 (the Act), which is aimed at curbing reverse-payment patent settlements, took effect on January 1. The Act codifies a presumption that any transfer of value...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Second Circuit Declares That, to Survive Motions to Dismiss, Antitrust Allegations Require Factual Support for All “Necessary...

Last Wednesday, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals partially vacated the judgment of the district court in In re Actos End-Payor Antitrust Litigation. In doing so, the Second Circuit allowed only plaintiffs’ claims that...more

Smart & Biggar

RxIP Update - 2016 Year in Review

Smart & Biggar on

The following are highlights of developments in Canadian life sciences intellectual property and regulatory law in 2016, updating our 2016 mid-year highlights. 1. Substantive patent law developments - Utility and...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Two reverse-payment appeals to watch

It has been over three years since the Supreme Court’s Actavis decision. Since then, numerous putative class actions alleging harm to competition as a result of “reverse-payment” settlements have flooded the courts. The...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

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

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

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Better Early than Never: SDNY Dismisses Lawsuit over Patent Settlement where Generics were Granted Early-Entry Licenses with...

On September 22, Judge Ronnie Abrams of the Southern District of New York dismissed an antitrust lawsuit against Takeda Pharmaceuticals and three generic drug manufacturers based on settlements they had reached regarding a...more

Miller Canfield

Supreme Court Rules That Pay-For-Delay Settlements Subject To Antitrust Challenges

Miller Canfield on

Antitrust challenges to so-called “pay-for-delay” settlements in drug patent suits are allowed under the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc....more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Par/Paddock Answers FTC Before Supreme Court

Par PharmaceuticalPar/Paddock, one of the generic drug company defendants in FTC v. Actavis Inc. et al. (the "reverse payment" ANDA settlement case now before the Supreme Court) filed its reponsive brief last week. In it,...more

16 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