News & Analysis as of

Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Patent Infringement Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA)

DLA Piper

Teva Ordered to Delist Inhaler Patents From FDA Orange Book

DLA Piper on

In Teva Branded Pharm. Prods. R&D v. Amneal Pharms. of N.Y., LLC, the US District Court for the District of New Jersey ordered Teva to delist five patents from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s Approved Drug Products...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

FTC's Campaign Against Improper Orange Book Listings Continues with Amicus Brief in Teva’s Challenge of Amneal Asthma Inhaler ANDA

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has filed an amicus brief in Teva Branded Pharmaceuticals Products R&D, Inc. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals of New York, LLC to further the agency’s efforts to promote and protect generic drug...more

American Conference Institute (ACI)

[Event] 20th Paragraph IV Disputes - April 25th - 26th, New York, NY

Hosted by American Conference Institute, the 20th Annual Paragraph IV Disputes & the 40th Anniversary of the Hatch-Waxman Act returns for another exciting year with curated programming that will take a retrospective look at...more

Dechert LLP

FTC Issues Policy Statement on Patent Listing

Dechert LLP on

The FTC is focusing its attention on the listing of pharmaceutical patents in the FDA’s Orange Book. Patent listing may be the subject of FTC inquiry even absent infringement litigation enforcing the relevant patents....more

Haug Partners LLP

The Sham Litigation Exception after AbbVie - Is the Subjective Element a Sham?

Haug Partners LLP on

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) sued AbbVie and Besins Healthcare, co-owners of a patent that covered brand AndroGel, in 2017. The FTC claimed that the manufacturers had brought “sham” patent infringement litigation in...more

American Conference Institute (ACI)

[Event] Paragraph IV Disputes Conference - November 9th - 10th, New York, NY

Join the conference that the “who’s who” of Hatch-Waxman litigators have designated as the forum which sets the standards for Paragraph IV practice. ACI’s Paragraph IV Litigation Conference is returning LIVE & IN-PERSON to...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Federal Trade Commission v. AbbVie Inc. (3d Cir. 2020)

The Federal Trade Commission carried out an (in)famous crusade against reverse payment (more provocatively, "pay for delay") settlements in ANDA litigation for almost a decade before eventually having the Supreme Court see...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

Quo Vadis FTC: What Does the Commission's Complaint Against Endo Pharmaceuticals and Others Say About the Future of Post-Actavis...

This alert, the title of which is adapted from a March 30, 2016 FTC Staff Attorney blog post, considers the FTC's first lawsuit challenging a so-called "no-AG" agreement. No-AG agreements are components of Hatch-Waxman...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

McDermott Will & Emery

Third Circuit Extends Actavis to Reverse Settlement Agreements Involving Non-Cash Consideration - King Drug Company of Florence,...

Addressing for the first time whether reverse settlement agreements involving non-cash consideration merit antitrust scrutiny, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reversed the district court, applying the...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

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

Cephalon and Teva's $1.2 Billion Consent Order with the FTC: Is it Really a Harbinger of Things to Come?

On June 17, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania approved a consent order (the “Consent Order”) between the Federal Trade Commission and defendants Cephalon, Inc. and its parent, Teva...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

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

Cozen O'Connor

Supreme Court: Reverse Payment Settlements Subject to Antitrust Scrutiny

Cozen O'Connor on

On June 17, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a decision that addressed a “reverse payment” settlement agreement between a brand-name pharmaceutical company (plaintiff patent holder) and multiple generic drug companies...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

The Supreme Court Heightens Antitrust Scrutiny For ANDA Reverse Payment Agreements Between Pharmaceutical Companies

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday ruled on the long-awaited FTC v. Actavis case concerning ANDA reverse payments, resolving a sharp circuit split. The Court held that settlement agreements that include reverse payments to end...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