Webinar: Orange Book listing sheets under the microscope
Key Considerations for Reshoring U.S. Drug Manufacturing
Drug Pricing Initiatives During the Trump Presidency
Podcast: IP Life Sciences Landscape: Aiding Orange and Purple Book Patent Owners in Developing PTAB Survival Skills
Patent law in Europe: What pharmaceutical companies need to know
EU excessive pricing laws
Polsinelli Podcast - Generic Drugs to Market - What's the Climate in 2014?
On May 21, 2025, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued its third round of warning letters – and its first under the Trump administration – against pharmaceutical manufacturers for allegedly improper listing of patents in...more
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is continuing to pursue pharmaceutical manufacturers for allegedly improperly listing patents in the “Orange Book,” delaying the entry of generic drug competitors. On May 21, the FTC...more
On May 21, 2025 the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued renewed warning letters to five companies regarding over 200 allegedly improperly-listed patents in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s Orange Book. Announcing...more
On October 31, 2024, the European Commission (the Commission) delivered its long-awaited decision in the Teva Copaxone case (which was published on April 8, 2025). Teva, a global pharmaceutical company, was fined EUR 462.6...more
West Virginia Attorney General (AG) Patrick Morrisey announced a total $17 million settlement agreement with pharmaceutical companies, Pfizer and Ranbaxy after more than a decade of litigation regarding the companies’ alleged...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit against pharmaceutical companies accused of violating antitrust laws by using reverse payments to delay entry of a generic version of a...more
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
On August 13, 2021, in a decision that largely flew under antitrust and patent practitioners’ radars, U.S. District Judge Lucy H. Koh mostly denied a motion to dismiss in the alleged “reverse payment” case, In Re Xyrem...more
On June 10th, Judge Manish S. Shah, U.S. District Court Judge for the Northern District of Illinois, dismissed (without prejudice) a class action lawsuit against AbbVie and AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd. by consumer groups, drug...more
In a holding that could significantly broaden the antitrust inquiry in the context of the Hatch-Waxman regulatory scheme, on February 13, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued an opinion that may have...more
On October 7, 2019, California became the first state to enact legislation—Assembly Bill 824 ("AB 824")—rendering certain pharmaceutical patent litigation settlement agreements presumptively anticompetitive. This alert...more
The First Circuit recently addressed an issue of broad significance in class action law. It explained how a class cannot be certified when there are more than a small number of uninjured class members, and how a defendant...more
In the European Union, Big Pharma has been operating with a target on its back for the best part of the last decade. Following its 2008 sector inquiry into the pharmaceutical sector, the Commission vowed to clamp down on...more
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
This week, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for writ of certiorari in a case that will give pharmaceutical companies pause when considering whether to settle patent challenges under Hatch-Waxman. The Supreme Court’s...more
One of the least disputed elements of class certification is Rule 23(a)(1) numerosity, and so there is relatively little analysis from the courts about it. Last month, however, a divided panel of the Third Circuit provided a...more
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
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
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