martindale.com
Legal Library
|
Search Results (1307) Documents on Litigation, Pharmaceuticals, Government Show: results per page Sort by:  | While We’re Waiting on Bartlett, Some New Preemption Challenges to Consider
Kurt R. Karst; Hyman, Phelps & McNamara, P.C.;
Legal Alert/Article May 21, 2013, previously published on May 20, 2013 As folks in the generic drug industry patiently await the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. v. Bartlett (Docket No. 12-142), a design defect generic drug preemption case (see our previous post here), we thought we would whet the preemption appetite with two new...
| | Let’s Do the Time Warp Again!
James A. Climer; Mazanec, Raskin & Ryder Co., L.P.A.;
Legal Alert/Article May 18, 2013, previously published on May 9, 2013 In the U.S., local governments and their employees are frequently protected from legal liability by various forms of immunity under state and/or federal law. To some, immunity unfairly shuts the courthouse door to legitimate plaintiffs. However, governments perform a number of unique functions...
| | Ranbaxy Resolves Criminal and Civil Charges Through Record Settlement
John T. Bentivoglio, Jennifer L. Bragg, Maya P. Florence, Michael K. Loucks, Gregory M. Luce; Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP;
Legal Alert/Article May 17, 2013, previously published on May 15, 2013 On May 13, 2013, generic drug manufacturer Ranbaxy USA Inc. (Ranbaxy), a subsidiary of Indian generic drug manufacturer Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited, pled guilty to seven felony charges as part of a global settlement pursuant to which Ranbaxy will pay a total of $500 million to resolve criminal and...
| | Plaintiffs Were Unable To Prove Race And Age Discrimination Against The Mayor & City Council of Baltimore
Kevin M. Cox; Semmes, Bowen & Semmes A Professional Corporation;
Legal Alert/Article May 17, 2013, previously published on May 2013 Glenwood Thomas, Eric Banks, and Lanny Boddy (“Plaintiffs”) filed a lawsuit against the City of Baltimore (“City”), claiming racial and age discrimination. They alleged their positions were eliminated in the Department of Public Works (“DPW”) and new, similar...
| | eDiscovery: The View From Singapore
Pooja S. Nair; Foley & Lardner LLP;
Legal Alert/Article May 8, 2013, previously published on May 6, 2013 The Singaporean government has adopted aggressive measures to become a regional center for dispute resolution and arbitration in areas ranging from intellectual property, to oil and gas arbitration.
| | Federal Circuit Upholds One Claim Covering Combigan
Courtenay C. Brinckerhoff; Foley & Lardner LLP;
Legal Alert/Article May 8, 2013, previously published on May 7, 2013 In Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the district court in part, finding that Allergan’s composition claims and most of its method claims are invalid as obvious, but upholding one method claim because it recites a non-obvious result. Some of the court’s...
| | Shire Settles All Pending Litigation with Actavis and Watson concerning INTUNIV®
Frommer Lawrence Haug LLP;
Legal Alert/Article April 30, 2013, previously published on April 25, 2013 Shire plc (LSE: SHP, NASDAQ: SHPG), announces that its subsidiary, Shire LLC, has settled all pending litigation with Actavis, Inc., Actavis LLC, and Actavis Elizabeth LLC (collectively “Actavis”) and Watson Laboratories, Inc.-Florida, Watson Pharma, Inc. and ANDA, Inc. (collectively...
| | U.S. Government Formally Seeks Supreme Court Review Of Recess Appointment Case
Mark Theodore; Proskauer Rose LLP;
Legal Alert/Article April 30, 2013, previously published on April 26, 2013 As noted here earlier, the government announced its intention to seek Supreme Court review of the DC Circuit decision which held that the President’s recess appointments to the NLRB were unconstitutional. The 138 page document NLRB v. Noel Canning, A Div. of Noel Corp., Cert Petition (April...
| | Who’s a Government Subcontractor Now?
Barbara A. Duncombe, Joshua D. Prentice; Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP;
Legal Alert/Article April 30, 2013, previously published on April 23, 2013 Much has been written lately about the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruling in UPMC Braddock v. Harris where three hospitals providing medical services to an HMO with a prime contract with the United States government are, in fact, considered “subcontractors”. The...
| | Federal Circuit Finds Yaz Patent Obvious
Courtenay C. Brinckerhoff; Foley & Lardner LLP;
Legal Alert/Article April 29, 2013, previously published on April 25, 2013 In Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the district court and held that Bayer’s patent covering its Yaz® birth control pill product is invalid as obvious. The court found a strong prima facie case of obviousness, and...
|
|