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) renewed its efforts to challenge pharmaceutical manufacturers that have allegedly listed patents improperly in the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) publication of...more
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
I. Introduction - No pharmaceutical antitrust decision has had more impact than the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, a decision which officially defined the term “reverse payment...more
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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