quinn emanuel
quinn emanuel urquhart & sullivan, llp | business litigation report
INSIDE
Sargon Enterprises, Inc.
v. University of Southern
California: A New “Gatekeeper”
Role for the Admission of
Expert Testimony
in California State Court
Page 5
Practice Area Updates:
Sports Litigation Update
Page 7
Insurance Litigation Update
Page 7
EU Litigation Update
Page 8
International Trade
Commission Update
Page 9
Regulatory Victory for Entergy
and Other Victories
Page 10
Attorney Advertising
October 2013
los angeles | new york | san francisco | silicon valley | chicago | washington, d.c. | tokyo | london | mannheim | hamburg | munich | paris | moscow | hong kong | sydney
(continued on page 2)
FTC v. Actavis:
The Future of Pharmaceutical Patent Settlements After the
Court’s Adoption of a “Rule of Reason” Framework
e recent Supreme Court decision in Federal Trade
Commission v. Actavis was closely watched and
anticipated because of the importance of patent
litigation in the legal/regulatory scheme codied in
the Hatch-Waxman amendments to the Federal Food
Drug and Cosmetic Act. FTC v. Actavis, 133 S. Ct. 2223
(2013). On June 17, 2013 the United States Supreme
Court reinstated the Federal Trade Commission’s
complaint against pharmaceutical manufacturers
which had entered into “reverse payment” settlements
of patent infringement litigation where the brand
name drug manufacturer had provided the potential
generic competitors with economic benets in return
for the generic applicants’ agreement to hold their
competitive products o the market for some time
period prior to expiration of the patent. Due to
provisions of the Hatch-Waxman amendments, which
allow a generic drug manufacturer to challenge the
validity of the patent to an already approved brand
name drug, this type of settlement benets both
the brand name drug manufacturer and the generic
manufacturer. e brand name drug manufacturer can
continue to market and sell the drug without generic
competition or fear of its patents being invalidated,
while the generic manufacturer receives monetary
compensation and an agreement as to the date on
which it can enter the market prior to expiration of
the patent. By reversing the lower court’s decision
dismissing the FTC’s complaint, the Court rejected
the position adopted by the Eleventh, Second, and
Federal Circuits that economic arrangements between
parties settling pharmaceutical patent litigation are
generally not subject to antitrust scrutiny, even if they
have anticompetitive eects, so long as the terms of
the settlements stay within the “scope of the patent.”
e Court, however, also declined to adopt the FTC’s
Quinn Emanuel’s London Ofce Continues Expansion with
Addition of Leading Litigator Ted Greeno
e rm is pleased to announce that Ted Greeno has joined the London oce as a
partner. Greeno joins the rm from Herbert Smith Freehills, where he was a partner in
the dispute resolution group. A well-known and highly-respected commercial litigator,
Greeno has litigated a wide range of matters involving antitrust, tax, product liability,
defense contracts, intellectual property, and public law. A signicant amount of his
work is devoted to the energy sector and many of his clients include top gas, oil, and
power companies. Some of his more notable achievements include acting as counsel to
BSkyB in its recovery of £320 million damages and costs from Electronic Data Systems,
and acting as counsel to Chevron in its successful defense of a claim by Total for around
£500 million arising from an oil depot explosion. Greeno has substantial experience in
international arbitrations involving oil, gas, and minerals disputes in Africa, Asia, the
Middle East, and South America. As Chambers UK 2012 describes him, Greeno is at
the “top of the league.”
Q
Quinn Emanuel Wins ILASA’s Gold Award for “Best USA Law
Firm: Growth Strategy”
see page 6
Susheel Kirpalani Receives SABANY’s 2013 Litigation
Achievement Award
see page 6
Jennifer Kash and Diane Doolittle Named Top Women Leaders
in Technology Law by
The Recorder
see page 4
