News & Analysis as of

Summary Judgment Generic Drugs

Goodwin

Court Grants Summary Judgment Ending AstraZeneca’s Lawsuit Challenging the IRA

Goodwin on

Today, the district court for the District of Delaware (Judge Connolly) granted the government’s motion for summary judgment on all claims brought by AstraZeneca in its Complaint challenging the Drug Price Negotiation Program...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

ANDA Litigation Settlements - Fall 2019

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Please see full Chart below for more information....more

McDermott Will & Emery

Definiteness, Drug Labels and Diclofenac, Oh My

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s invalidity and infringement judgments for patents directed to a topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, finding that a patent claim reciting a...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

“Consisting Essentially Of:” Expanding the Scope of Indefiniteness

The Federal Circuit recently affirmed a district court’s determination, holding a group of patents invalid for indefiniteness. In December 2014, HZNP Medicines LLC (“Horizon”) brought suit against Actavis Laboratories UT,...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

District of Delaware Grants Motions for Summary Judgment in Three Risperdal Gynecomastia Cases

In a trio of recent decisions arising out of cases alleging that an antipsychotic medication, Risperdal, and its generic, risperidone, had caused gynecomastia (breast tissue growth) in men, the United States District Court...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Pernix Ir. Pain DAC v. Alvogen Malta Operations, Ltd.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Pernix Ir. Pain DAC v. Alvogen Malta Operations, Ltd., Civ. No. 16-139-WCB, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81419 (D. Del. May 15, 2018) (Bryson, C.J.)....more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - March 2018

Knobbe Martens on

Distribution Agreements Can Constitute Offers for Sale Under Section 102(b) - In The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2014-1469, 2014-1504, the Federal Circuit held that a distribution agreement qualified as...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Allergan Sales, LLC v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Allergan Sales, LLC v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., Civ. No. 2:15-cv-1471-JRG-RSP (Lead), 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176262 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 24, 2017) (Gilstrap, J.)....more

Holland & Knight LLP

New Reverse-Payment Decision Sheds Further Light on Plaintiffs’ Causation Burden

Holland & Knight LLP on

As post-Actavis antitrust litigation over so-called “reverse payment” patent settlements proceeds, courts continue to provide further illumination about what evidence a private plaintiff would need to offer to survive summary...more

Smart & Biggar

Ontario Superior Court dismisses summary judgment motion in Lansoprazole Section 8 Claim

Smart & Biggar on

On February 27, 2017, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (2017 ONSC 1348) dismissed a motion for summary judgment brought by Abbott Laboratories and Takeda Pharmaceuticals, the defendants in an action for damages brought...more

Proskauer - New England IP Blog

Heartburn for Defense After Jury Verdict in Pepcid® Dispute

The recent jury verdict in a dispute over a generic version of the heartburn medication Pepcid® Complete® would be enough for anyone to reach for a few tablets of the accused product. After an eight day trial presided over by...more

Knobbe Martens

Ranbaxy and AstraZeneca Prevail in Nexium® Pay-For-Delay Case

Knobbe Martens on

On November 21, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld a 2014 jury verdict for AstraZeneca (AZ) and Ranbaxy regarding a 2012 payment of $700 million from AstraZeneca for Ranbaxy to abandon its challenge...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

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

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

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

Goodwin

Supreme Court Declines to Review Scope of Section 271(e)(1) Safe-Harbor

Goodwin on

Earlier this week, the United States Supreme Court denied Amphastar Pharmaceutical’s petition for certiorari regarding the scope of the safe-harbor of 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1), a provision that generic drug and biosimilar makers...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Second Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Sham Citizen Petition Claim, Summary Judgment on False Advertising Claims **WEB ONLY**

Addressing Sherman Act and Lanham Act claims arising out of an Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA), the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld the district court’s dismissal of the plaintiffs’ Sherman Act claim...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Supplier to ANDA Filer Is Not Liable for Induced Infringement Until After ANDA Approval - Shire LLC v. Amneal Pharms., LLC

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the scope of the safe harbor provision of § 271(e)(1), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the district court, holding that supplying an active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) to the filer of...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

Robins Kaplan LLP

Baxter Healthcare Corp. v. HQ Specialty Pharma Corp.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Baxter Healthcare Corp. v. HQ Specialty Pharma Corp., Civ. No. 13-6228 (JBS/KMW), 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128002 (D.N.J. Sept. 23, 2015) (Simandle, C.J.)...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Braintree Labs., Inc. v. Novel Labs., Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Braintree Labs., Inc. v. Novel Labs., Inc., Case No. 3:11-cv-01341-PGS-LHG, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70993 (D.N.J. June 2, 2015) (Sheridan, J.) - Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Suprep® Bowel Prep Kit (sodium...more

McGuireWoods LLP

Abilify®’s Saga Continues: Otsuka’s Eight-Day Streak of Generic-Free Competition Ends, For Now

McGuireWoods LLP on

On May 27, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland granted FDA and the Defendant-Intervenors summary judgment against Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development and Commercialization,...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Circuit Find Fractures in Roche Boniva Patents

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Hoffman-LaRoche, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s summary judgment that two Roche Boniva patents are invalid as obvious. The conclusion of obviousness is not particularly remarkable...more

24 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