We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 72

Third Circuit extends Actavis to reverse settlement agreements involving non-cash consideration
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • July 29 2015

Addressing for the first time whether reverse settlement agreements involving non-cash consideration merit antitrust scrutiny, the U.S. Court of


Allegations of antitrust and patent misuse surviving a motion to dismiss
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • October 30 2015

The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey was tasked with determining whether allegations in Defendants’ antitrust and patent misuse


Reverse payment settlements subject to antitrust challenge
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • July 30 2015

In a class action case assessing the implications of antitrust law in a patent infringement and validity settlement agreement, the Supreme Court of


Split decisions regarding class certification in provigil antitrust lawsuits
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • October 30 2015

In two antitrust class actions in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the court denied class certification as to


A no-AG settlement agreement is subject to Actavis’ rule of reason analysis
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • October 30 2015

Plaintiffs, direct purchasers of the brand-name drug Lamictal (lamotrigine), sued Lamictal’s producer, SmithKline Beecham Corporation (SmithKline


Accused infringer rides antitrust roller coaster
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • October 30 2015

Addressing antitrust issues in connection with a dismissed patent infringement lawsuit, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a


Sham-wow! antitrust liability may attach to sham administrative petitions
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • October 1 2014

Addressing whether the “sham” exception to Noerr-Pennington immunity is limited to sham litigation in courts, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the


FTC takes a broad, "generic" approach to Actavis in Amicus brief
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • August 22 2013

The Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) battle against "reverse-payment" settlements continues. In an amicus brief recently submitted in the case of In


A new front in the patent wars: CJEU asked for guidance on limits to injunctive relief
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union, USA
  • April 11 2013

The patent wars between large technology companies continue unabated. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is set to provide guidance on


Contractual duty to deal does not equal antitrust duty to deal
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • July 30 2014

Addressing for the first time whether a patent holder under a contractual duty to deal is also subject to an antitrust duty to deal, the U. S. Court