Intellectual Property E-Bulletin

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Intellectual Property E-Bulletin"

Transcription

1 Issue 78 August 2012 Inside This Issue ABA Antitrust Section Intellectual Property E-Bulletin The Intellectual Property Committee is pleased to present the latest issue of our monthly E-Bulletin, providing updates and information on intellectual property-related antitrust developments and policy. Please send any comments, suggestions, and items to be noted in the next issue by to Katherine Ambrogi or Ken Vorrasi U.S. Cases - The Third Circuit Rules that Pay for Delay Settlements are Subject to Antitrust Scrutiny - Antitrust Lawsuit by Former NFL Players Against NFL and NFL Teams Dismissed - Seventh Circuit Rules on Reach of Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvement Act U.S. Agencies - FTC Criticizes Import Bans in Standard Essential Patent Cases EU and International Developments - European Commission Closes Investigation into Areva and Siemens Non-Compete Agreement Following distribution to the AT-IP Listserv, E-Bulletins are posted to the AT-IP Committee Website as section member content at cfm?com=at315000&pg=2. Contributors Katherine Ambrogi Federal Trade Commission 601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC [P] [E] KAmbrogi@ftc.gov Eric S. O Connor Sheppard Mullin 30 Rockefeller Plaza New York, NY [P] [E] eoconnor@sheppardmullin.com Matthew R. Maddox Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP 450 Lexington Avenue New York, NY [P] [E] Matthew.Maddox@davispolk.com Craig Zieminski Vinson & Elkins LLP 2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 3700 Dallas, TX [P] [E] CZieminski@velaw.com Gregory Butler WilmerHale 1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC [P] [E] Greg.Butler@wilmerhale.com Lee Roach Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 1500 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC [P] [E] Lee.Roach@dbr.com Wendy Fu Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 767 Fifth Avenue New York, NY [P] [E] Wendy.Fu@weil.com Neeraj K. Gupta Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP 450 Lexington Avenue New York, NY [P] [E] Neeraj.Gupta@davispolk.com

2 U.S. Cases The Third Circuit Rules that Pay for Delay Settlements are Subject to Antitrust Scrutiny In re K-DUR Antitrust Litigation, No (3d Cir. July 16, 2012) In a ruling that departed from the Second, Eleventh and Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal, the Third Circuit in In re K-DUR Antitrust Litigation held that a quick look rule of reason applies to payments from patent holders to a generic patent challenger who agrees to delay entry into the market. The Third Circuit disagreed with the reasoning of the Eleventh Circuit, which ruled on the same settlement agreement in Schering-Plough Corp. v. FTC, 402 F.3d 1056 (11th Cir. 2005). The Eleventh Circuit had applied a scope of the patent test, which allows for antitrust evaluation of only those portions of a settlement agreement that go beyond the scope of the patent involved. The Second and Federal Circuit Courts have applied the same test. Under the quick look rule of reason identified by the Third Circuit, a finder of fact must treat any payment from a patent holder to a generic patent challenger who agrees to delay entry into the market as prima facie evidence of an unreasonable restraint of trade, which could be rebutted by showing that the payment (1) was for a purpose other than delayed entry or (2) offers some pro-competitive benefit. The Federal Trade Commission filed an amicus brief in the case. In a statement released after the court s ruling, FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz said, The Third Circuit Court of Appeals seems to have gotten it just right: These sweetheart deals are presumptively anticompetitive. As our Bureau of Economics has estimated, they cost American consumers $3.5 billion a year in higher health care costs. Restricting these arrangements, as many in Congress have proposed, would reduce federal government debt by $5 billion over 10 years, according the Congressional Budget Office. It s time for the pharmaceutical companies to return to the side of consumers. Statement by Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Ruling in the K-Dur 20 Matter (July 16, 2012), available at kdur.shtm. Antitrust Lawsuit by Former NFL Players Against NFL and NFL Teams Dismissed Washington v. National Football League, No (D. Minn. June 13, 2012) On June 13, 2012, the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota granted defendants motion to dismiss the antitrust claims of former professional football players who sought to represent a class of similarly situated individuals. Defendants were the National Football League, NFL Ventures, L.P., NFL Productions, LLC, NFL Enterprises, LLC, and each of the 32 NFL teams. Plaintiffs alleged that the defendants violated the antitrust laws by constraining the sale of their images and likenesses. The former players contended that, by not allowing them the rights to game films and images from the games in which they played, the defendants monopolized the market for former players likenesses in violation of the Sherman Act. The court found that the intellectual property involved was historical football game footage that the entities had to cooperate to produce and sell, and which the NFL owns and the individual teams have never 2

3 separately owned. The court held that the NFL and its individual teams can conspire under the antitrust laws to market each teams individually owned property, but not property the teams and the NFL can only collectively own. Thus, the court held that plaintiffs could not establish any concerted action that is unlawful under the Sherman Act. Seventh Circuit Rules on Reach of Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvement Act Minn-Chem v. Agrium Inc., No , 2012 WL (7th Cir. June 27, 2012) On June 27, 2012, the Seventh Circuit ruled that the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvement Act ( FTAIA ) relates to the merits of a Sherman Act claim, but does not place limitations on jurisdiction. The FTAIA precludes application of the Sherman Act to conduct involving trade or commerce with foreign nations unless (1) such conduct has a direct, substantial, and reasonably foreseeable effect (A) on [domestic import commerce]; or (B) on export trade or export commerce... of a person engaged in such trade or commerce in the United States; and (2) such effect gives rise to a [Sherman Act claim]. 15 U.S.C. 6a. The court also held that the term direct in 15 U.S.C. 6a(1) does not mean an effect that must follow as an immediate consequence of the defendant s activity, as the Ninth Circuit had ruled in United States v. LSL Biotechnologies, 379 F.3d 672 (9th Cir. 2004), but that the term direct means only a reasonably proximate causal nexus. As a result, the Seventh Circuit s Minn-Chem ruling created a circuit split on the reach of the FTAIA. In Minn-Chem, a purported class of consumers of potash (i.e., potassium-rich mineral and chemical salts mined from naturally occurring ore deposits and used in agricultural fertilizers) alleged a worldwide conspiracy by producers to restrict global output of potash, and thereby to artificially inflate prices. The complaint described a 600 percent increase in potash prices as a result of the conspiracy, and detailed the manner in which the defendants allegedly managed their collective output in order to achieve this increase. Ruling en banc and reversing an earlier panel decision, the Seventh Circuit upheld a trial court s order denying a motion to dismiss the class action. In doing so, the court held that the complaint sufficiently alleged conduct involving trade or commerce with foreign nations that had a direct, substantial, and reasonably foreseeable effect on domestic or import U.S. commerce. The court analyzed two prevailing school[s] of thought regarding what it takes to show direct effects. First, the court considered and rejected the Ninth Circuit s ruling in LSL Biotechnologies. In LSL Biotechnologies, the Ninth Circuit had adopted and applied the Supreme Court s interpretation of the term direct in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act ( FSIA ). According to the Seventh Circuit in Minn- Chem, the Ninth Circuit had jumped too quickly to its assumption that the FSIA and the FTAIA use the word direct in the same way. The Seventh Circuit instead adopted a competing standard articulated by the U.S. Department of Justice in a 2005 article on the FTAIA and in an appellate brief submitted in LSL Biotechnologies. According to this alternate view, the term direct means only a reasonably proximate causal nexus. According to the Seventh Circuit, that definition is more consistent with the language of the statute, in which the word direct addresses the classic concern about remoteness. The Seventh Circuit did also note, though, that [j]ust as tort law cuts off recovery for those whose injuries are too remote from the cause of an injury, so does the FTAIA exclude from the Sherman Act foreign activities that are too remote from the ultimate effects on U.S. domestic or import commerce. Applying this standard, the court held that the plaintiffs had sufficiently pled a conspiracy to fix worldwide prices for potash that would have had a direct, substantial and reasonably foreseeable impact on U.S. potash imports. 3

4 US Agencies FTC Criticizes Import Bans in Standard Essential Patent Cases The U.S. Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) recently weighed in on the use of import bans in two cases pending before the U.S. International Trade Commission ( ITC ). Both cases concern a dispute over the use of standard-essential patents, or patents embodying technology that is a necessary component of a certain industry standard. Owners of standard-essential patents who participant in standard setting organizations generally agree that they will license the technology on reasonable and non-discriminatory ( RAND ) terms in exchange for the inclusion of the company s technology in the industry standard. In both cases, Google seeks to capitalize upon its ownership of standard-essential patents acquired through its acquisition of Motorola Mobility. The technology underlying these standard essential patents are necessary components of the industry standards applicable to Apple s iphone and Microsoft s Xbox. Though Google made a RAND commitment concerning the standard essential patents at issue, the companies have yet to reach a licensing agreement, and Google now urges the ITC to place an import ban on both the iphone and the Xbox. The FTC urged the ITC not to issue the import ban. The FTC warned that import bans in favor of RANDcommitted, standard essential patent holders could allow for hold-ups in favor of those patent holders. Supported by an import ban, a standard essential patent holder could extract royalties far beyond the true value of the patent since licensees would likely pay a high royalty rate rather than face the significant switching costs associated with creating and conforming to a new industry standard that excludes the standard essential patent. The FTC warned of negative economic consequences associated with hold-ups. According to the FTC, hold-ups overvalue inventions, increase costs and uncertainty for industry participants, many of whom are innovators, and raise market prices. To stave off these negative consequences, the FTC recommended that the ITC refuse to impose an import ban on the iphone and the Xbox. If the ITC follows the FTC s recommendation in these two cases and other future cases, the ruling could provide an advantage to companies negotiating for licenses to use standard essential patents. Third Party United States Federal Trade Commission s Statement on the Public Interest, In the Matter of Certain Gaming and Entertainment Consoles, Related Software, and Components Thereof, Inv. No TA-752 (June 6, 2012), available at Press Release, Federal Trade Commission, FTC Testimony Expresses Concern that Owners of Standard- Essential Patents May Obtain Injunctions Enabling Them to Hold Up Other Firms (July 11, 2012), available at 4

5 EU and International Developments European Commission Closes Investigation into Areva and Siemens Non-Compete Agreement The European Commission ( EC ) has closed its investigation into the competitive implications of a noncompete agreement between Siemens and Areva by making legally binding certain commitments made by the two companies. In 2001, Areva and Siemens launched a joint venture named Areva NP SAS, which designed and built parts for nuclear islands in nuclear power plants. In 2009, Siemens exited the joint venture and triggered a non-compete agreement. After conducting its investigation, the EC found that the non-compete was excessive to the extent that it prevented Siemens from selling products where the joint venture was only a reseller of certain products. For the remaining products, the EC found that the proposed duration 11 years after the joint venture s expiration was also excessive. In March 2012, Siemens and Areva offered to limit their non-compete agreement to three years after Siemens left the joint venture and to limit the scope of agreement to the joint venture s core products and services. The EC accepted this offer and made it legally binding. If the companies do not abide by these commitments, the EC can levy a fine of up to 10 percent of the companies total annual turnover without having to prove an antitrust violation. Press Release, European Commission, Commission Makes Legally Binding Commitments by Siemens and Areva Concerning Nuclear Technology Markets (June 18, 2012), available at pressreleasesaction.do?reference=ip/12/618&format=html&aged=0&language=en&guilanguage=en. 5

Reverse Payment Settlements In Pharma Industry: Revisited

Reverse Payment Settlements In Pharma Industry: Revisited Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Reverse Payment Settlements In Pharma Industry: Revisited

More information

Antitrust and Intellectual Property: Recent Developments in the Pharmaceuticals Sector

Antitrust and Intellectual Property: Recent Developments in the Pharmaceuticals Sector September 2009 (Release 2) Antitrust and Intellectual Property: Recent Developments in the Pharmaceuticals Sector Aidan Synnott & William Michael Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP www.competitionpolicyinternational.com

More information

United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 14 8003 MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC, v. Plaintiff Appellant, AU OPTRONICS CORP., et al., Defendants Appellees. Petition for Leave to Take an

More information

IN THIS ISSUE MESSAGE FROM THE EDITOR. Winter 2015

IN THIS ISSUE MESSAGE FROM THE EDITOR. Winter 2015 A publication of the Exemptions & Immunities Committee of the Section of Antitrust Law, American Bar Association IN THIS ISSUE CONTENTS Message from the Editor 1 Articles Staying Alive At The Plate: The

More information

INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND ANTITRUST. Clarity Put on Hold as FTAIA Conflict/Confusion Continues

INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND ANTITRUST. Clarity Put on Hold as FTAIA Conflict/Confusion Continues INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND ANTITRUST Clarity Put on Hold as FTAIA Conflict/Confusion Continues Attorney Advertising Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome Models used are not clients but may be

More information

Antitrust and Intellectual Property

Antitrust and Intellectual Property and Intellectual Property July 22, 2016 Rob Kidwell, Member Antitrust Prohibitions vs IP Protections The Challenge Harmonizing U.S. antitrust laws that sanction the illegal use of monopoly/market power

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. v. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. v. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CASE 0:11-cv-03354-PAM-AJB Document 22 Filed 06/13/12 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Gene Washington, Diron Talbert, and Sean Lumpkin, on behalf of themselves and all others

More information

The Supreme Court Decision in Empagran

The Supreme Court Decision in Empagran The Supreme Court Decision On June 14, 2004, the United States Supreme Court issued its much anticipated opinion in Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd. v. Empagran S.A, 2004 WL 1300131 (2004). This closely watched

More information

Pharmaceutical Product Improvements and Life Cycle Management Antitrust Pitfalls 1

Pharmaceutical Product Improvements and Life Cycle Management Antitrust Pitfalls 1 Pharmaceutical Product Improvements and Life Cycle Management Antitrust Pitfalls 1 The terms product switching, product hopping and line extension are often used to describe the strategy of protecting

More information

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. THIRD PARTY UNITED STATES FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION S STATEMENT ON THE PUBLIC INTEREST

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. THIRD PARTY UNITED STATES FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION S STATEMENT ON THE PUBLIC INTEREST UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. In the Matter of CERTAIN GAMING AND ENTERTAINMENT CONSOLES, RELATED SOFTWARE, AND COMPONENTS THEREOF Inv. No. 337-TA-752 THIRD PARTY UNITED

More information

FTC AND DOJ ISSUE JOINT REPORT REGARDING ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

FTC AND DOJ ISSUE JOINT REPORT REGARDING ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS OF INTEREST FTC AND DOJ ISSUE JOINT REPORT REGARDING ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS Interesting and difficult questions lie at the intersection of intellectual property rights and

More information

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features:

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features: Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act: When Do U.S. Antitrust Laws Apply to Foreign Conduct? Navigating the Applicability of the FTAIA's "Effects

More information

Increased Scrutiny of Reverse Payment Settlements: Recent Cases in E.D. of PA and 2nd Circuit Suggest Change May Be Ahead for Pharma Clients

Increased Scrutiny of Reverse Payment Settlements: Recent Cases in E.D. of PA and 2nd Circuit Suggest Change May Be Ahead for Pharma Clients Increased Scrutiny of Reverse Payment Settlements: Recent Cases in E.D. of PA and 2nd Circuit Suggest Change May Be Ahead for Pharma Clients By Francis P. Newell and Jonathan M. Grossman Special to the

More information

CPI Antitrust Chronicle March 2015 (1)

CPI Antitrust Chronicle March 2015 (1) CPI Antitrust Chronicle March 2015 (1) Carte Blanche for SSOs? The Antitrust Division s Business Review Letter on the IEEE s Patent Policy Update Stuart M. Chemtob Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati www.competitionpolicyinternational.com

More information

DOJ and USPTO Issue Policy Statement on Remedies for F/RAND-Encumbered SEPs

DOJ and USPTO Issue Policy Statement on Remedies for F/RAND-Encumbered SEPs JANUARY 7-11, 2013 THIS WEEK S CONTRIBUTING AUTHOR IS DINA KALLAY EDITED BY KOREN W. WONG-ERVIN PATENTS DOJ and USPTO Issue Policy Statement on Remedies for F/RAND-Encumbered SEPs On January 8, the DOJ

More information

FTC Orders Compulsory IP Licensing to Remedy Competitive Concerns in Honeywell/Intermec Transaction

FTC Orders Compulsory IP Licensing to Remedy Competitive Concerns in Honeywell/Intermec Transaction SEPTEMBER 8-15, 2013 WRITTEN BY MAC CONFORTI AND LOGAN BREED MERGERS & ACQUISITIONS FTC Orders Compulsory IP Licensing to Remedy Competitive Concerns in Honeywell/Intermec Transaction The FTC required

More information

PATENT CASE LAW UPDATE

PATENT CASE LAW UPDATE PATENT CASE LAW UPDATE Intellectual Property Owners Association 40 th Annual Meeting September 9, 2012 Panel Members: Paul Berghoff, McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP Prof. Dennis Crouch, University

More information

Antitrust Litigation. Seventh Circuit Update. Antitrust Litigation Seventh Circuit Update: Fall 2013

Antitrust Litigation. Seventh Circuit Update. Antitrust Litigation Seventh Circuit Update: Fall 2013 Antitrust Litigation Antitrust Litigation Seventh Circuit Update: Fall 2013 Seventh Circuit Update FREEBORN & PETERS LLP ANTITRUST LITIGATION UPDATE: FALL 2013 Dear Reader: The last twelve months or so

More information

Pay-for-Delay Settlements: Antitrust Violation or Proper Exercise of Pharmaceutical Patent Rights?

Pay-for-Delay Settlements: Antitrust Violation or Proper Exercise of Pharmaceutical Patent Rights? Pay-for-Delay Settlements: Antitrust Violation or Proper Exercise of Pharmaceutical Patent Rights? By Kendyl Hanks, Sarah Jacobson, Kyle Musgrove, and Michael Shen In recent years, there has been a surge

More information

PENDING LEGISLATION REGULATING PATENT INFRINGEMENT SETTLEMENTS

PENDING LEGISLATION REGULATING PATENT INFRINGEMENT SETTLEMENTS PENDING LEGISLATION REGULATING PATENT INFRINGEMENT SETTLEMENTS By Edward W. Correia* A number of bills have been introduced in the United States Congress this year that are intended to eliminate perceived

More information

LOUISIANA WHOLESALE DRUG CO., INC., et al., Respondents. UPSHER-SMITH LABORATORIES, INC., Petitioner, v.

LOUISIANA WHOLESALE DRUG CO., INC., et al., Respondents. UPSHER-SMITH LABORATORIES, INC., Petitioner, v. Nos. 12-245, 12-265 In the Supreme Court of the United States MERCK & CO., INC., v. Petitioner, LOUISIANA WHOLESALE DRUG CO., INC., et al., Respondents. UPSHER-SMITH LABORATORIES, INC., Petitioner, v.

More information

APLI Antitrust & Licensing Issues Panel: SEP Injunctions

APLI Antitrust & Licensing Issues Panel: SEP Injunctions APLI Antitrust & Licensing Issues Panel: SEP Injunctions Robert D. Fram Covington & Burling LLP Advanced Patent Law Institute Palo Alto, California December 11, 2015 1 Disclaimer The views set forth on

More information

Case5:12-cv RMW Document41 Filed10/10/12 Page1 of 10

Case5:12-cv RMW Document41 Filed10/10/12 Page1 of 10 Case:-cv-0-RMW Document Filed0/0/ Page of 0 E-FILED on 0/0/ 0 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION REALTEK SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION, v. Plaintiff,

More information

International Trade Daily Bulletin

International Trade Daily Bulletin International Trade Daily Bulletin VOL. 14, NO. 187 SEPTEMBER 26, 2014 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY This BNA Insights article by Hitomi Iwase, Tony Andriotis & Paul Dimitriadis examines the recent U.S. legal

More information

Product Improvements and Life Cycle Management Antitrust Pitfalls

Product Improvements and Life Cycle Management Antitrust Pitfalls Product Improvements and Life Cycle Management Antitrust Pitfalls NJ IP Law Association's 26th Annual Pharmaceutical/Chemical Patent Practice Update Paul Ragusa December 5, 2012 2012 Product Improvements

More information

Health Care Law Monthly

Health Care Law Monthly Health Care Law Monthly February 2013 Volume 2013 * Issue No. 2 Contents: Copyright ß 2013 Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., a member of the Lexis- Nexis group of companies. All rights reserved. HEALTH CARE

More information

Standard-Setting Policies and the Rule of Reason: When Does the Shield Become a Sword?

Standard-Setting Policies and the Rule of Reason: When Does the Shield Become a Sword? MAY 2008, RELEASE ONE Standard-Setting Policies and the Rule of Reason: When Does the Shield Become a Sword? Jennifer M. Driscoll Mayer Brown LLP Standard-Setting Policies and the Rule of Reason: When

More information

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC, Plaintiff and Appellant, vs.

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC, Plaintiff and Appellant, vs. No. 14-8003 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC, Plaintiff and Appellant, vs. AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION et al., Defendants and Appellees. On Appeal from an

More information

Pharmaceutical Pay for Delay Settlements

Pharmaceutical Pay for Delay Settlements Pharmaceutical Pay for Delay Settlements UCIP Seminar 12 November 2012 www.morganlewis.com Outline Background Goals of the Hatch-Waxman Act Price Effects of Generic Entry Pay-for-Delay Patent Settlements

More information

Pharmaceutical Patent Settlement Cases: Mixed Signals for Settling Patent Litigation

Pharmaceutical Patent Settlement Cases: Mixed Signals for Settling Patent Litigation By Margaret J. Simpson Tel: 312 923-2857 Fax: 312 840-7257 E-mail: msimpson@jenner.com The following article originally appeared in the Spring 2004 issue of the Illinois State Bar Association s Antitrust

More information

Petitioner, Respondent. On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Twelfth Circuit

Petitioner, Respondent. On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Twelfth Circuit No. 2014-01 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, 2014 BOLTON CHEMISTS CORPORATION and WALDER MEDICAL SUPPLY, GMBH,, v. STARK PHARMACEUTICALS, LTD., Respondent. On Writ of Certiorari

More information

Injunctive Relief in U.S. Courts

Injunctive Relief in U.S. Courts Injunctive Relief in U.S. Courts Elizabeth Stotland Weiswasser Patent Litigation Remedies Session/Injunctions April 13, 2012 Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP Fordham IP Conference April 13, 2012 Footer / document

More information

by Harvey M. Applebaum and Thomas O. Barnett

by Harvey M. Applebaum and Thomas O. Barnett ANTITRUST LAW: Ninth Circuit upholds Kodak's liability for monopolizing the "aftermarket" for servicing of its equipment but vacates some damages and modifies injunction. by Harvey M. Applebaum and Thomas

More information

PAYING FOR DELAY AND THE RULE OF REASON FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION V ACTAVIS INC ET AL 1

PAYING FOR DELAY AND THE RULE OF REASON FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION V ACTAVIS INC ET AL 1 COMPETITION LAW PAYING FOR DELAY AND THE RULE OF REASON FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION V ACTAVIS INC ET AL 1 LIGIA OSEPCIU 2 JUNE 2013 On 17 June 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down its

More information

Avoiding Trade Association Antitrust Pitfalls. Jan P. Levine Megan Morley

Avoiding Trade Association Antitrust Pitfalls. Jan P. Levine Megan Morley Avoiding Trade Association Antitrust Pitfalls Jan P. Levine Megan Morley February 16, 2017 Introduction 2 Trade Associations and Antitrust Pro- Competitive Purposes Enforcement agencies and courts recognize

More information

United States Court of Appeals. Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals. Federal Circuit Case: 12-1170 Case: CASE 12-1170 PARTICIPANTS Document: ONLY 99 Document: Page: 1 97 Filed: Page: 03/10/2014 1 Filed: 03/07/2014 2012-1170 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit SUPREMA,

More information

CHAPTER TWELVE -- ANTITRUST AND SPORTS: INTRA-LEAGUE RESTRAINTS -- LIMITATIONS ON OWNERSHIP, LEAGUE MEMBERSHIP, AND FRANCHISE RELOCATION

CHAPTER TWELVE -- ANTITRUST AND SPORTS: INTRA-LEAGUE RESTRAINTS -- LIMITATIONS ON OWNERSHIP, LEAGUE MEMBERSHIP, AND FRANCHISE RELOCATION CHAPTER TWELVE -- ANTITRUST AND SPORTS: INTRA-LEAGUE RESTRAINTS -- LIMITATIONS ON OWNERSHIP, LEAGUE MEMBERSHIP, AND FRANCHISE RELOCATION I. INTRODUCTION This Chapter focuses on a variety of disputes that

More information

Federal Court Dismisses Claims Against NPE for Allegedly Fraudulently Enforcing Its Patents; Upholds Breach of Contract and Promissory Estoppel Claims

Federal Court Dismisses Claims Against NPE for Allegedly Fraudulently Enforcing Its Patents; Upholds Breach of Contract and Promissory Estoppel Claims FEBRUARY 4-8, 2013 WRITTEN BY KOREN W. WONG-ERVIN PATENTS Federal Court Dismisses Claims Against NPE for Allegedly Fraudulently Enforcing Its Patents; Upholds Breach of Contract and Promissory Estoppel

More information

the Patent Battleground:

the Patent Battleground: The Antitrust Enforcers Charge Onto the Patent Battleground: What Technology Companies Need to Know About Standard-Related Patents, RAND Commitments, and Competition Law Presenters: Willard K. Tom John

More information

The Antitrust Review of the Americas 2017

The Antitrust Review of the Americas 2017 The Antitrust Review of the Americas 2017 Published by Global Competition Review in association with Analysis Group Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP Baker & Hostetler LLP Baker & McKenzie LLP Bennett Jones

More information

Recent Trends in Patent Damages

Recent Trends in Patent Damages Recent Trends in Patent Damages Presentation for The Austin Intellectual Property Law Association Jose C. Villarreal May 19, 2015 These materials reflect the personal views of the speaker, are not legal

More information

MEMORANDUM. Supplemental International Antitrust Discussion Memorandum FTAIA Issue

MEMORANDUM. Supplemental International Antitrust Discussion Memorandum FTAIA Issue MEMORANDUM From: AMC Staff To: All Commissioners Date: July 21, 2006 Re: Supplemental International Antitrust Discussion Memorandum FTAIA Issue On June 7, 2006, the Commission deferred completion of its

More information

Injunctive Relief for Standard-Essential Patents

Injunctive Relief for Standard-Essential Patents Litigation Webinar Series: INSIGHTS Our take on litigation and trial developments across the U.S. Injunctive Relief for Standard-Essential Patents David Healey Sr. Principal, Fish & Richardson Houston,

More information

Fed. Circ. Should Clarify Irreparable Harm In Patent Cases

Fed. Circ. Should Clarify Irreparable Harm In Patent Cases Fed Circ Should Clarify Irreparable Harm In Patent Cases Law360, New York (December 02, 2013, 1:23 PM ET) -- As in other cases, to obtain an injunction in a patent case, the plaintiff is required to demonstrate,

More information

Re: In the Matter of Robert Bosch GmbH, FTC File No

Re: In the Matter of Robert Bosch GmbH, FTC File No The Honorable Donald S. Clark, Secretary Federal Trade Commission 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20580 Re: In the Matter of Robert Bosch GmbH, FTC File No. 121-0081 Dear Secretary Clark: The

More information

District Court Denies Motion to Dismiss FTC Section 5 Complaint Against Qualcomm

District Court Denies Motion to Dismiss FTC Section 5 Complaint Against Qualcomm CPI s North America Column Presents: District Court Denies Motion to Dismiss FTC Section 5 Complaint Against Qualcomm By Greg Sivinski 1 Edited by Koren Wong-Ervin August 2017 1 Early this year, the US

More information

Latest Developments On Injunctive Relief For Infringement Of FRAND-Encumbered SEPs

Latest Developments On Injunctive Relief For Infringement Of FRAND-Encumbered SEPs August 7, 2013 Latest Developments On Injunctive Relief For Infringement Of FRAND-Encumbered SEPs This memorandum is directed to the current state of the case law in the U.S. International Trade Commission

More information

Patent Portfolio Management and Technical Standard Setting: How to Avoid Loss of Patent Rights. Bruce D. Sunstein 1 Bromberg & Sunstein LLP

Patent Portfolio Management and Technical Standard Setting: How to Avoid Loss of Patent Rights. Bruce D. Sunstein 1 Bromberg & Sunstein LLP Patent Portfolio Management and Technical Standard Setting: How to Avoid Loss of Patent Rights I. The Antitrust Background by Bruce D. Sunstein 1 Bromberg & Sunstein LLP Standard setting can potentially

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No JOHN EGAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No JOHN EGAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated Case: 18-1794 Document: 003113177688 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/06/2019 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 18-1794 JOHN EGAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated

More information

Introduction into US business law VIII FS 2017

Introduction into US business law VIII FS 2017 Introduction into US business law VIII FS 2017 Repetition last time: torts > Torts > Civil wrong > Relevance (incl. Excessive damages reforms?) > Intentional > Negligence > To proof: > Duty to care, breach

More information

A ((800) (800) Supreme Court of the United States. No IN THE

A ((800) (800) Supreme Court of the United States. No IN THE No. 03-724 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD, HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE INC., ROCHE VITAMINS INC., BASF AG, BASF CORP., RHÔNE-POULENC ANIMAL NUTRITION INC., RHÔNE-POULENC INC.,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 0 Case:-cv-0-NC Document Filed0/0/ Page of Abbas Kazerounian, Esq. (SBN: 0) ak@kazlg.com Fischer Avenue, Unit D Costa Mesa, CA Telephone: (00) 00-0 Facsimile: (00) 0- HYDE & SWIGART Joshua B. Swigart,

More information

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2009-1471 CLEARPLAY, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MAX ABECASSIS and NISSIM CORP, Defendants-Appellants. David L. Mortensen, Stoel Rives LLP, of Salt

More information

FTC Approves Final Order in Google SEP Investigation, Responding to Commentators in a Separate Letter

FTC Approves Final Order in Google SEP Investigation, Responding to Commentators in a Separate Letter WRITTEN BY BRENDAN J. COFFMAN AND KOREN W. WONG-ERVIN JULY 22-26, 2013 PATENTS FTC Approves Final Order in Google SEP Investigation, Responding to Commentators in a Separate Letter Last week, in a 2-1-1

More information

Nos , , , IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Nos , , , IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Case: 12-10492 09/04/2014 ID: 9229254 DktEntry: 103 Page: 1 of 20 Nos. 12-10492, 12-10493, 12-10500, 12-10514 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,

More information

DIRECT PURCHASERS STANDING TO SUE FOR WALKER PROCESS FRAUD IN RE: DDAVP DIRECT PURCHASER ANTITRUST LITIGATION

DIRECT PURCHASERS STANDING TO SUE FOR WALKER PROCESS FRAUD IN RE: DDAVP DIRECT PURCHASER ANTITRUST LITIGATION DIRECT PURCHASERS STANDING TO SUE FOR WALKER PROCESS FRAUD IN RE: DDAVP DIRECT PURCHASER ANTITRUST LITIGATION Rick Duncan Denise Kettleberger Melina Williams Faegre & Benson, LLP Minneapolis, Minnesota

More information

Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court of the United States No. 05-85 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States POWEREX CORP., Petitioner, v. RELIANT ENERGY SERVICES, INC., ET AL., Respondents. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of

More information

No IN THE. AU OPTRONICS ET AL., Respondents.

No IN THE. AU OPTRONICS ET AL., Respondents. No. 14-1122 IN THE MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC, v. Petitioner, AU OPTRONICS ET AL., Respondents. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit REPLY BRIEF

More information

Federal Circuit Provides Guidance on Methodologies for Calculating FRAND Royalty Rates, Vacating the Jury Award in Ericsson v.

Federal Circuit Provides Guidance on Methodologies for Calculating FRAND Royalty Rates, Vacating the Jury Award in Ericsson v. In this Issue: WRITTEN BY COURTNEY J. ARMOUR AND KOREN W. WONG-ERVIN EDITED BY KOREN W. WONG-ERVIN The views expressed in this e-bulletin are the views of the authors alone. DECEMBER 1-6, 2014 Federal

More information

Antitrust Update for the ABA Corporate Counseling Committee. September 2011

Antitrust Update for the ABA Corporate Counseling Committee. September 2011 Antitrust Update for the ABA Corporate Counseling Committee September 2011 Discussion Outline Litigation Update Civil Agency Update Criminal Agency Update European Union Update Litigation Barak Bassman

More information

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit CANCER RESEARCH TECHNOLOGY LIMITED AND SCHERING CORPORATION, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BARR LABORATORIES, INC. AND BARR PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Defendants-Appellees.

More information

Court in Microsoft v. Motorola Dismisses Injunctive Relief for Motorola Asserted Patents and Motorola s Entire H.264 SEP Portfolio

Court in Microsoft v. Motorola Dismisses Injunctive Relief for Motorola Asserted Patents and Motorola s Entire H.264 SEP Portfolio DECEMBER 3-7, 2012 WRITTEN BY KOREN W. WONG-ERVIN PATENTS Court in Microsoft v. Motorola Dismisses Injunctive Relief for Motorola Asserted Patents and Motorola s Entire H.264 SEP Portfolio In Microsoft

More information

Court Dismisses NPE s Group Boycott Claims Against RPX, Motorola, Samsung, and Others

Court Dismisses NPE s Group Boycott Claims Against RPX, Motorola, Samsung, and Others THIS WEEK S CONTRIBUTING AUTHOR IS M. BRINKLEY TAPPAN EDITED BY KOREN W. WONG-ERVIN JANUARY 21-25, 2013 PATENTS Court Dismisses NPE s Group Boycott Claims Against RPX, Motorola, Samsung, and Others On

More information

From Walker Process to In re DDAVP: Should Direct Purchasers Have Antitrust Standing in Walker Process Claims?

From Walker Process to In re DDAVP: Should Direct Purchasers Have Antitrust Standing in Walker Process Claims? NOVEMBER 2008, RELEASE TWO From Walker Process to In re DDAVP: Should Direct Purchasers Have Antitrust Standing in Walker Process Claims? Aidan Synnott Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP From

More information

Memorandum. Florida County Court Clerks. National Center for Lesbian Rights and Equality Florida. Date: December 23, 2014

Memorandum. Florida County Court Clerks. National Center for Lesbian Rights and Equality Florida. Date: December 23, 2014 Memorandum To: From: Florida County Court Clerks National Center for Lesbian Rights and Equality Florida Date: December 23, 2014 Re: Duties of Florida County Court Clerks Regarding Issuance of Marriage

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ) NEW ENGLAND CARPENTERS HEALTH ) BENEFITS FUND, et al., ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-12277-PBS ) ) McKESSON CORPORATION, ) Defendant.

More information

EU Advocate General Opines That Seeking Injunctions On FRAND-Encumbered SEPs May Constitute an Abuse of Dominance

EU Advocate General Opines That Seeking Injunctions On FRAND-Encumbered SEPs May Constitute an Abuse of Dominance NOVEMBER 17-22, 2014 WRITTEN BY KENNETH H. MERBER EDITED BY KOREN W. WONG-ERVIN The views expressed in this e-bulletin are the views of the author alone. In this Issue: EU Advocate General Opines That

More information

independent software developers. Instead, Plaintiffs attempt to plead that they are aggrieved direct

independent software developers. Instead, Plaintiffs attempt to plead that they are aggrieved direct In re Apple iphone Antitrust Litigation Doc. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 IN RE APPLE IPHONE ANTITRUST LITIGATION Case No.: -cv-0-ygr ORDER GRANTING APPLE S MOTION TO

More information

AIPLA Comments on Questionnaire on IP Misuse Antitrust Guidelines

AIPLA Comments on Questionnaire on IP Misuse Antitrust Guidelines October 14, 2015 2015 10 14 Mr. Liu Jian Price Supervision and Anti-Monopoly Bureau National Development and Reform Commission People s Republic of China Re: AIPLA Comments on Questionnaire on IP Misuse

More information

BLIZZARD ENTERTAINMENT INC. v. CEILING FAN SOFTWARE LLC, et al., 41 F.Supp.2d 1227 (C.D. Cal. 2013)

BLIZZARD ENTERTAINMENT INC. v. CEILING FAN SOFTWARE LLC, et al., 41 F.Supp.2d 1227 (C.D. Cal. 2013) BLIZZARD ENTERTAINMENT INC. v. CEILING FAN SOFTWARE LLC, et al., 41 F.Supp.2d 1227 (C.D. Cal. 2013) Order re: Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims JAMES V. SELNA, District Judge. This action arises

More information

Defenses & Counterclaims II: Remedies:

Defenses & Counterclaims II: Remedies: Law 677 Patent Law Spring 2002 Defenses & Counterclaims II: Antitrust & Patent Misuse Remedies: The Calculation of Patent Damages Antitrust Violation Antitrust & Patent Misuse An affirmative violation

More information

Case 6:08-cv LED Document 363 Filed 08/02/10 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

Case 6:08-cv LED Document 363 Filed 08/02/10 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION Case 6:08-cv-00325-LED Document 363 Filed 08/02/10 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION REEDHYCALOG UK, LTD. and REEDHYCALOG, LP vs. Plaintiffs,

More information

Court Approves 24.3 Million in Attorneys' Fees in Pay-For- Delay Litigation

Court Approves 24.3 Million in Attorneys' Fees in Pay-For- Delay Litigation WRITTEN BY SHYLAH R. ALFONSO AND LOGAN BREED JUNE 30 -JULY 6, 2014 PATENTS Court Approves 24.3 Million in Attorneys' Fees in Pay-For- Delay Litigation On June 30, a federal judge in Tennessee issued an

More information

Civil Price-Fixing Cases In EU Vs. US: 10 Key Issues

Civil Price-Fixing Cases In EU Vs. US: 10 Key Issues Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Civil Price-Fixing Cases In EU Vs. US: 10 Key Issues

More information

FRAND or Foe: Litigating Standard Essential Patents

FRAND or Foe: Litigating Standard Essential Patents FRAND or Foe: Litigating Standard Essential Patents Munich Seminar May 2013 Munich, Germany Christopher Dillon (Dillon@fr.com) Jan Malte Schley (Schley@fr.com) Brian Wells (wells@fr.com) Presentation Overview

More information

PCI SSC Antitrust Compliance Guidelines

PCI SSC Antitrust Compliance Guidelines Document Number: PCI-PROC-0036 Version: 1.2 Editor: Mauro Lance PCI-PROC-0036 PCI SSC ANTITRUST COMPLIANCE GUIDELINES These guidelines are provided by the PCI Security Standards Council, LLC ( PCI SSC

More information

Google Settles with FTC Over SEPs; FTC Votes to Close Investigation Into Google s Search-Related Practices

Google Settles with FTC Over SEPs; FTC Votes to Close Investigation Into Google s Search-Related Practices December 24, 2012 - January 4, 2013 THIS WEEK S CONTRIBUTING AUTHOR IS FLAVIA FORTES EDITED BY KOREN W. WONG-ERVIN PATENTS Google Settles with FTC Over SEPs; FTC Votes to Close Investigation Into Google

More information

Case 1:05-cv JDT-TAB Document 30 Filed 11/28/2005 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

Case 1:05-cv JDT-TAB Document 30 Filed 11/28/2005 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION Case 1:05-cv-00618-JDT-TAB Document 30 Filed 11/28/2005 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION DANIEL WALLACE, Plaintiff, v. FREE SOFTWARE FOUNDATION,

More information

No IN THE. MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC, Petitioner, v. AU OPTRONICS CORP., ET AL., Respondents.

No IN THE. MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC, Petitioner, v. AU OPTRONICS CORP., ET AL., Respondents. No. 14-1122 IN THE MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC, Petitioner, v. AU OPTRONICS CORP., ET AL., Respondents. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit BRIEF

More information

2011 Foley & Lardner LLP Attorney Advertising Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome Models used are not clients but may be representative

2011 Foley & Lardner LLP Attorney Advertising Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome Models used are not clients but may be representative 2011 Foley & Lardner LLP Attorney Advertising Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome Models used are not clients but may be representative of clients 321 N. Clark Street, Suite 2800, Chicago,

More information

Insight. NLRB Continues Attack on Class and Collective Action Waivers FEBRUARY 22, 2016 IN-DEPTH DISCUSSION. NLRB Decisions

Insight. NLRB Continues Attack on Class and Collective Action Waivers FEBRUARY 22, 2016 IN-DEPTH DISCUSSION. NLRB Decisions IN-DEPTH DISCUSSION FEBRUARY 22, 2016 NLRB Continues Attack on Class and Collective Action Waivers BY WILLIAM EMANUEL, MISSY PARRY, HENRY LEDERMAN, AND MICHAEL LOTITO There seems to be no end in sight

More information

Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court of the United States No. 12-651 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- AMY AND VICKY,

More information

Registration of Trademarks and Service Marks in the USPTO: Why Do It? Ted Davis Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP

Registration of Trademarks and Service Marks in the USPTO: Why Do It? Ted Davis Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP Trademarks and Service : Why Do It? Ted Davis Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP The s Two Registers They are: the Supplemental Register; and the Principal Register. 2 Does your company apply to register

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER 15-2820-cv Patterson v. Raymours Furniture Co. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER

More information

ON NOVEMBER 6, 2001, the U.S. Court of Appeals

ON NOVEMBER 6, 2001, the U.S. Court of Appeals 21 Biotechnology Law Report 13 Number 1 (February 2002) Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. Brief Analysis of Recent Pharmaceutical/IP Decisions DAVID A. BALTO AMERICAN BIOSCIENCE, INC. V. THOMPSON 269 F.3D1077, 2001

More information

The Ongoing Dispute Over the REDSKINS Name

The Ongoing Dispute Over the REDSKINS Name The Ongoing Dispute Over the REDSKINS Name Roberta L. Horton and Michael E. Kientzle July 2015 A federal district court ruling issued Wednesday, July 8, ordered cancellation of the REDSKINS federal trademark

More information

Recent Developments in Federal and State Arbitration Law

Recent Developments in Federal and State Arbitration Law Recent Developments in Federal and State Arbitration Law by Shelly L. Ewald, Senior Partner Watt Tieder Newsletter, Winter 2005-2006 Despite the extensive history and widespread adoption of arbitration

More information

Seeking Disapproval: Presidential Review Of ITC Orders

Seeking Disapproval: Presidential Review Of ITC Orders Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Seeking Disapproval: Presidential Review Of ITC Orders

More information

GERMAN COMPETITION LAW CHANGES: NEW RULES ON MERGER CONTROL, MARKET DOMINANCE, DAMAGES CLAIMS, AND CARTEL FINES

GERMAN COMPETITION LAW CHANGES: NEW RULES ON MERGER CONTROL, MARKET DOMINANCE, DAMAGES CLAIMS, AND CARTEL FINES The M&A Lawyer GERMAN COMPETITION LAW CHANGES: NEW RULES ON MERGER CONTROL, MARKET DOMINANCE, DAMAGES CLAIMS, AND CARTEL FINES By Andreas Grünwald Andreas Grünwald is a partner in the Berlin office of

More information

Pharmaceutical Patent Settlements A Presumption in Reverse

Pharmaceutical Patent Settlements A Presumption in Reverse AUGUST 2009, RELEASE ONE Pharmaceutical Patent Settlements A Presumption in Reverse Kristina Nordlander & Patrick Harrison Sidley Austin LLP Pharmaceutical Patent Settlements A Presumption in Reverse Kristina

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION BISCOTTI INC., Plaintiff, v. MICROSOFT CORP., Defendant. ORDER Case No. 2:13-cv-01015-JRG-RSP Before the Court are

More information

Global IP Management Hot-Topic Round-Up

Global IP Management Hot-Topic Round-Up Global IP Management Hot-Topic Round-Up 1 Panelist Dr. Rouget F. (Ric) Henschel, Partner, Chemical, Biotechnology & Pharmaceutical Practice, and Co-Chair, Life Sciences Industry Team, Foley & Lardner Sven

More information

Antitrust/Intellectual Property Interface Under U.S. Law

Antitrust/Intellectual Property Interface Under U.S. Law BEIJING BRUSSELS CHICAGO DALLAS FRANKFURT GENEVA HONG KONG LONDON LOS ANGELES NEW YORK SAN FRANCISCO SHANGHAI SINGAPORE SYDNEY TOKYO WASHINGTON, D.C. Antitrust/Intellectual Property Interface Under U.S.

More information

ANSI Legal Issues Forum Washington, D.C. October 12, 2006 Antitrust Update

ANSI Legal Issues Forum Washington, D.C. October 12, 2006 Antitrust Update ANSI Legal Issues Forum Washington, D.C. October 12, 2006 Antitrust Update Richard S. Taffet Bingham McCutchen LLP (212) 705-7729 richard.taffet@bingham.com Gil Ohana Cisco Systems, Inc. (408) 525-2853

More information

3.2 Antitrust Sherman Act (Section 1, Per Se Violation) Tying Agreement Defense Of Justification

3.2 Antitrust Sherman Act (Section 1, Per Se Violation) Tying Agreement Defense Of Justification 3.2 Antitrust Sherman Act (Section 1, Per Se Violation) Tying Agreement Defense Of Justification In this case the Plaintiff claims that the Defendant violated Title 15, United States Code, Section 1, commonly

More information

PATENT CASE LAW UPDATE

PATENT CASE LAW UPDATE PATENT CASE LAW UPDATE Intellectual Property Owners Association 40 th Annual Meeting September 9, 2012 Panel Members: Paul Berghoff, McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP Prof. Dennis Crouch, University

More information

In the Supreme Court of the United States

In the Supreme Court of the United States No.06-937 In the Supreme Court of the United States QUANTA COMPUTER, INC., ET AL., v. Petitioners, LG ELECTRONICS, INC., Respondent. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

More information

Recent Decisions Provide Some Clarity on How Courts and Government Agencies Will Likely Resolve Issues Involving Standard-Essential Patents

Recent Decisions Provide Some Clarity on How Courts and Government Agencies Will Likely Resolve Issues Involving Standard-Essential Patents Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property Volume 13 Issue 1 Article 4 9-1-2013 Recent Decisions Provide Some Clarity on How Courts and Government Agencies Will Likely Resolve Issues Involving Standard-Essential

More information

Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court of the United States No. 12-929 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States ATLANTIC MARINE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, v. J-CREW MANAGEMENT, INC., Respondent. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States

More information

Supreme Court to Address Removal of State Parens Patriae Actions to Federal Courts Under CAFA

Supreme Court to Address Removal of State Parens Patriae Actions to Federal Courts Under CAFA theantitrustsource w w w. a n t i t r u s t s o u r c e. c o m A u g u s t 2 0 1 3 1 Supreme Court to Address Removal of State Parens Patriae Actions to Federal Courts Under CAFA Blake L. Harrop S States

More information