- Affirmative Recovery
- Alternative Dispute Resolution
- American Indian Law and Policy
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation
- Appellate Advocacy and Guidance
- Business Litigation
- Childhood Sexual Abuse Litigation
- Civil Rights and Police Misconduct
- Class Action Litigation
- Commercial/Project Finance and Real Estate
- Corporate Governance and Special Situations
- Domestic and International Arbitration
- Ediscovery
- Health Care Litigation
- Insurance and Catastrophic Loss
- Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation
- Litigation Support Services
- Mass Tort Attorneys
- Medical Malpractice Attorneys
- Personal Injury Attorneys
- Restructuring and Business Bankruptcy
- Wealth Planning, Administration, and Disputes
-
April 7, 2020Robins Kaplan Announces Practice Group Leadership Appointments
-
April 3, 2020Hollis Salzman, Tara Sutton Named to Lawdragon "500 Leading Lawyers in America" List
-
April 3, 2020Roman Silberfeld Named to 2020 Lawdragon Hall of Fame
-
April 10, 2020Minnesota State Bar Association: Probate and Trust Section CLE
-
Postponed10th Annual Disability Justice Seminar
-
PostponedRewriting the Odds: The $20M Settlement that Changed the Legal Landscape
-
April 7, 2020CARES Act: Title I – Reader-Friendly Version with Linked Table of Contents
-
April 7, 2020Summary of the Small Business Administration’s Regulations for the Paycheck Protection Program
-
April 6, 2020Courts are Successfully Using Technology to Stay Operational in the Face of COVID-19
Find additional firm contact information for press inquiries.
Read our attorneys' take on the latest news and trends in the legal and business industries.
GENERICally Speaking Hatch Waxman Bulletin
The Hatch-Waxman Litigation practice group at Robins Kaplan LLP is pleased to offer the latest edition of their quarterly publication regarding ANDA patent litigation issues and the generics business.
GENERICally Speaking Winter 2020
Winter 2020
The Winter 2020 issue of the GENERICally Speaking email campaign provides you and your company with some of the knowledge beneficial to remaining attentive to the complexity of ANDA patent litigation.
A few of the relevant court decisions highlighted in this issue:
- Persion Pharms. LLC v. Alvogen Malta Operations Ltd.
- HZNP Medicines LLC v. Actavis Labs. UT, Inc.
- Horizon Meds. LLC v. Dr. Reddy’s Labs., Inc.
Relevant ANDA Updates highlighted in this issue:
- ANDA Approvals
- ANDA Litigation Settlements
- Generic Launches
- New ANDA Cases
Related Professionals
Oren D. Langer
Partner
Jeffrey Alan Hovden
Partner
Christopher A. Pinahs
Partner
Kelsey J. McElveen
Associate
Haroon N. Mian
Associate
The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s obviousness determination, holding that the district court correctly applied the law of inherency and did not clearly err in its factual findings relating to obviousness and objective indicia.
After a five-day jury trial finding non-infringement, Plaintiff’s Rule 59(e) motion for a new trial was denied.
Summary judgment of no contributory infringement granted but denied with respect to induced infringement.
While its decision was a “close call,” the court was not prepared to find that plaintiff’s tactics entirely baseless or its litigation conduct so egregious as to warrant fees.
Relying on a Federal Circuit decision that invalidated for lacking an adequate written description a patent from which the patents-in-suit descend, the court denied plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction for failing to show a likelihood of success on the merits.
Because Delaware was an improper venue for defendant Mylan, and defendant 3M demonstrated that various factors weighed in favor of a transfer, the case was transferred to the Northern District of West Virginia.
The district court’s findings regarding indefiniteness, non-infringement, and non-obviousness were affirmed by the appellate court.
Subscribe to our quarterly GENERICally Speaking Update.
Subscribe Now
Any information that you send us in an e-mail message should not be confidential or otherwise privileged information. Sending us an e-mail message will not make you a client of Robins Kaplan LLP. We do not accept representation until we have had an opportunity to evaluate your matter, including but not limited to an ethical evaluation of whether we are in a conflict position to represent you. Accordingly, the information you provide to us in an e-mail should not be information for which you would have an expectation of confidentiality.
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.