Insights
Search Results
News Articles
10.01.25
LMG Life Sciences Recognizes Wilson Sonsini, Attorneys in 2025 Guide
On September 30, 2025, LMG Life Sciences announced the 2025 edition of its guide, which identifies and ranks the leading law firms and individuals in the life sciences industry across the United States. The rankings are the result of firm participation in questionnaires, partner interviews to gather market feedback, client surveys, and independent research. LMG Life Sciences has conducted research and published rankings since 2012. This year, six Wilson Sonsini practices and 18 attorneys have been recognized in the guide.
News Articles
8.04.25
Wilson Sonsini Attorneys Recognized in Lexology Index: Competition 2025
On July 31, 2025, nine Wilson Sonsini attorneys were selected among the best in their fields in the Lexology Index: Competition guide for 2025, a comprehensive list of the leading competition experts worldwide. The ranked individuals advise and represent clients in internal, regulatory, and criminal investigations, and more.
Alerts
1.22.25
Navigating Pharmaceutical Patent Settlements and Reverse Payments: Key Takeaways from the FTC’s Latest MMA Reports
On January 16, 2025, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Bureau of Competition published four reports on pharmaceutical patent settlement agreements filed under the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) for fiscal years 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021. The last time the FTC published this type of report was in December 2020, covering fiscal year 2017.
Alerts
9.26.24
FTC Sues Nation’s Largest PBMs, Continuing Biden Administration’s Antitrust Scrutiny of the Life Sciences Sector
The Biden administration’s antitrust scrutiny of the life sciences industry continued this week as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed an administrative complaint against the nation’s largest pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) and their affiliated group purchasing organizations (GPOs).1 The PBMs are Caremark Rx, Express Scripts, and OptumRx.
News Articles
9.17.24
Wilson Sonsini, Attorneys Recognized in 2024 Edition of LMG Life Sciences
On September 17, 2024, LMG Life Sciences recognized several Wilson Sonsini practices and 19 of its attorneys in the 2024 edition of its guide, which identifies and ranks the leading law firms and individuals in the life sciences industry across the United States. The rankings are the result firm participation in questionnaires, partner interviews to gather market feedback, client surveys, and independent research. LMG Life Sciences has conducted research and published rankings since 2012.
News Articles
8.12.24
Wilson Sonsini Attorneys Recognized in 2024 WWL Competition Guide
On August 1, 2024, ten Wilson Sonsini attorneys were selected among the best in their fields in Who's Who Legal's annual comprehensive guide to the leading competition and state aid attorneys and economists worldwide. The ranked individuals advise and represent clients in internal, regulatory, and criminal investigations, and more. The listings are a result of an extensive research process that includes continuous data collection and analysis, recommendations, and feedback from eminent practitioners and interviews.
Alerts
11.15.23
FTC Disputes Patent Listings of 10 Brand Drug Makers as Improperly Listed in FDA’s Orange Book
On November 7, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) sent notice letters1 to 10 brand drug manufacturers of drug-device combination products, including drugs delivered by asthma inhalers, epinephrine autoinjectors, and cyclosporine dropper bottles. The FTC announced that the agency intends to avail itself of the regulatory process under 21 C.F.R. § 314.53(f)(1) and submitted patent listing dispute communications to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding more than 60 unique patents in over 100 Orange Book listings as improperly or inaccurately listed. The FTC’s actions follow its recent policy statement issued on September 14, 2023, warning pharmaceutical companies that they could face enforcement actions by the FTC for improperly listing patents in the Orange Book as an unfair method of competition in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act.
Alerts
7.05.23
Jury Finds Gilead and Teva Did Not Engage in an Anticompetitive Pay-for-Delay Scheme for HIV Drugs
On June 30, 2023, a jury in the Northern District of California found Gilead and Teva not liable in a trial accusing the companies of engaging in an illegal reverse payment to delay generic versions of two HIV drugs, Truvada (emtricitabine/tenofovir) and Atripla (efavirenz-/-emtricitabine-/-tenofovir). Following a five-week trial and two days of deliberations, the jury found that the plaintiffs failed to show that: 1) Gilead had market power within a market that included Truvada and/or Atripla, and 2) Gilead made a reverse payment to Teva to delay the entry of generic competition.1 This case marks the third jury verdict in favor of defendants in reverse-payment cases since the 2013 FTC v. Actavis decision—there have been no verdicts for plaintiffs.2
News Articles
10.05.22
Wilson Sonsini and Attorneys Recognized in 2022 Edition of LMG Life Sciences
LMG Life Sciences recognized several Wilson Sonsini practices and 16 of its attorneys in the 2022 edition of its guide, which identifies and ranks the leading law firms and individuals in the life sciences industry.
Alerts
8.08.22
Seventh Circuit Affirms Denial of Claims Brought Against AbbVie
The Seventh Circuit recently confirmed that Actavis is the appropriate framework to assess biosimilar patent settlements, despite the differences in the regulatory structure—the first appellate court ruling on this issue. In a decision authored by Judge Easterbrook, the Seventh Circuit affirmed the Northern District of Illinois Court's decision dismissing antitrust claims brought against AbbVie and biosimilar Humira manufacturers by indirect purchasers of Humira. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, et al. v. AbbVie Inc. et al., No. 20-2402 (7th Cir. 2022). In a short and pointed opinion the court held that AbbVie's obtaining and invoking of 132 patents did not constitute monopolization under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, and that AbbVie's patent settlements with biosimilar Humira manufacturers in Europe and the United States were not unlawful reverse payments under FTC v. Actavis, 570 U.S. 136 (2013) because they were separate settlements under distinct patent regimes, and not part of one global settlement that exchanged early entry in one jurisdiction for delayed entry in another, as the plaintiffs alleged.
Alerts
4.18.21
Fifth Circuit Upholds Federal Trade Commission Ruling in Impax Laboratories, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission and Grants Substantial Deference to the FTC
On April 13, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued an opinion in Impax Laboratories, Inc v. Federal Trade Commission, affirming the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) unanimous decision that Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s settlement with Impax Laboratories, Inc. constituted a reverse payment and violated Section 5 of the FTC Act. In so doing, the Fifth Circuit reiterated the rule-of-reason burden-shifting framework for reverse payment cases, and also granted considerable deference to the FTC.
Client Highlights
3.06.17
First Circuit Reverses Dismissal of Amphastar Antitrust Suit
On March 6, 2017, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati obtained a victory for client Amphastar Pharmaceuticals at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit when the court revived an antitrust suit against Momenta Pharmaceuticals and Sandoz that was previously dismissed by the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Momenta and Sandoz compete with Amphastar in the market for generic enoxaparin, an important anticoagulant drug. Amphastar alleged that Momenta and Sandoz misled a standards-setting organization (SSO) known as the U.S. Pharmacopeial Convention (USP) and its members—in the course of the USP's adoption of a chemistry standard for enoxaparin—into adopting a method for testing to show compliance with the standard over which Momenta and Sandoz had a pending patent application by failing to disclose their application. Once the method became the standard and other competitors like Amphastar had to use the approved method, Momenta and Sandoz sued, claiming patent infringement. In Amphastar's case, Momenta and Sandoz secured a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction that blocked Amphastar for several months before it was dissolved. Amphastar claimed that this conduct violated the Sherman Act by giving Momenta and Sandoz an improper monopoly over the market for generic enoxaparin.