• Excessive Pricing And Sham Patent Litigation: The Pfizer And AbbVie Decisions

    Competition law is a critical tool in seeking to maintain some semblance of reasonable pricing in the pharmaceutical market. It is particularly important as legislators around the world appear extremely hesitant to address pharmaceutical pricing in meaningful ways, regrettably influenced by well-funded lobbying.

    Two recent competition law decisions discussed below illustrate the importance of and challenges to regulating the pharmaceutical sector. In the first, the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) partially upheld and partially reversed and remanded (pending briefing) a decision by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) fining Pfizer and Flynn close to £90 million for abuse of dominant position in the excessive pricing of an anti-epilepsy drug. The CAT decision is problematic because it creates unnecessary and unwarranted hurdles to findings of excessive pricing in the UK. In the second decision, the US Federal Trade Commission succeeds in proving that AbbVie engaged in abuse of monopoly power by engaging in sham patent litigation against two generic producers in order to delay market entry of competitive products. The Federal District Court found that AbbVie’s patent lawyers by “clear and convincing” evidence had knowingly pursued patent infringement claims without chance of success for no other purpose than to delay market entry.

    Continue Reading ...
  • WTO Panel On Australia’s Tobacco Plain Packaging: A Fact Dependent Analysis Of TRIPS Art 20

    The WTO Panel’s long-awaited Reports in the four complaints against Australia’s tobacco plain packaging measures were circulated on 28 June 2018, more than 4 years since Panel establishment. Australia’s victory was absolute. It successfully defended its measures against every claim. Yet closer analysis of the Panel’s reasoning regarding specific provisions such as Article 20 of the TRIPS Agreement may cause some concern for policy-makers given how much the Panel’s conclusions relied on its assessment of the facts and evidence before it.

    Continue Reading ...
  • With 1/3 ownership of “Let’s Get It On”, Structured Asset Sales goes after Sheeran’s “Thinking Out Loud”

    The mag “People” wrote of the Sheeran case:

    Ed Sheeran is facing a $100 million plagiarism lawsuit alleging that his 2014 hit “Thinking Out Loud” borrowed too heavily from Marvin Gaye‘s sultry bedroom classic, “Let’s Get It On.”

    According to TMZ, Structured Asset Sales has filed a suit claiming the monster single from Sheeran’s X album uses melodic, harmonic, rhythmic, instrumental and dynamic elements taken from Gaye’s 1973 song. A rep for Sheeran did not respond to PEOPLE’s request for comment.

    (…)

    the Townsend family has sold a third of their shares in “Let’s Get It On” to Structured Asset Sales, the organization is relaunching the suit.

    link: https://people.com/music/ed-sheeran-100-million-thinking-out-loud-plagiarism-lawsuit/

    Continue Reading ...
  • Adidas gets remand under SAS in Nike case: the petitioner, not the Director gets to define the contours of the IPR proceeding

    From the CAFC:


    We hold that remand is appropriate here. The Court
    explained in SAS that in establishing inter partes review,
    Congress set forth “a process in which it’s the petitioner,
    not the Director, who gets to define the contours of the
    proceeding.” 138 S. Ct. at 1355. The Court held that if
    the Director institutes review proceedings, the review
    must proceed “in accordance with or in conformance to the
    petition,” id. at 1356 (internal quotations omitted), a
    “petition describing ‘each claim challenged’ and ‘the
    grounds on which the challenge to each claim is based,’”
    id. at 1355 (quoting 35 U.S.C. § 312(a)(3)). “Nothing
    suggests the Director enjoys a license to depart from the
    petition and institute a different inter partes review of his
    own design.” Id. at 1356 (emphasis in original). The
    Court found that “the petitioner’s petition, not the Director’s
    discretion, is supposed to guide the life of the litigation,”
    id., and “that the petitioner’s contentions, not the
    Director’s discretion, define the scope of the litigation all
    the way from institution through to conclusion,” id. at
    1357

    Continue Reading ...
  • PTAB Life Sciences Report

    By Bryan Helwig — About the PTAB Life Sciences Report: Each month we will report on developments at the PTAB involving life sciences patents. ABS Global, Inc. v. XY, LLC PTAB Petition: IPR2018-01224; filed June 08, 2018. View Petition here. Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 9,365,822, entitled ″System and method for sorting cells,″ describes an improved flow cytometer system particularly adapted to use for sex-selected sperm sorting including enhanced sheath fluid and other strategies which minimize stress on the sperm cells. Improved collection systems and techniques for the process are described so that commercial applications of sperm samples as…

    Continue Reading ...
  • 懸架

                            目次はこちら

    懸架

    (SUSPEND)
    $$ As the microstrip 8 is suspended in air within one of the conduit parasitic capacitance effects can be reduced to acceptable levels. / マイクロストリップ8は管路の1つの中で空中に懸架されているので、寄生容量効果(parastic capacitance effects)は許容される程度のレベルまで低減される。(USP6229411)

    $$ The shaft is suspended with respect to active magnetic bearings and may be rotated by an electric motor, indicated ghosted at 16 and having a rotor coaxial with shaft 11, or by a fluid impeller 17 in receipt of fluid at elevated pressure. / 軸は能動型磁気軸受に対して懸架され、16において鎖線で示し、かつ軸11と共軸線関係のロータを有する電動モータにより、あるいは高圧で流体を受け取る場合流体インペラ17によって回転することができる。(USP5355040)

    $$ The magnetic thrust bearing 22 serves to "suspend" the shaft in an axial direction against an axial thrust exerted on the shaft aerodynamically, such as by the process or driving gas. / 磁気スラスト軸受22は、例えばプロセスガスあるいは推進ガスにより軸に空気力学的に加えられる軸受方向スラストに対して軸を軸線方向に「懸架」するよう作用する。(USP5355040)

    (SUSPENSION)
    $$ The distal ends of the arms 146 extend into slots 148 provided in the housing 114b of the suspension module with a small clearance. / アーム146の末端部は、懸架モジュールのハウジング114bに設けられたスロット148内に小さなクリアラン]スを伴って延び込んでいる。(USPA02174556)

    $$ One example is a suspension shaft or spring which is confined to a chamber filled with a ferrofluid. / 一例は、強磁性流体を充填した室内に限定された懸架シャフト又はスプリングである。(USP6815063)

                            目次はこちら

    Continue Reading ...