Antitrust/Competition
Arnold & Porter's Antitrust/Competition life sciences practice has an international reputation for effective antitrust and competition advocacy in the U.S. and EU life sciences sectors. We coordinate multidisciplinary teams of lawyers, economists, and life sciences industry experts to craft solutions that address our clients' international regulatory and litigation needs. Over many decades, our Antitrust/Competition attorneys have effectively assisted life sciences clients in the full range of competition-related engagements, including transactions, government criminal and civil investigations, litigation, and counseling.
-
Sophisticated Understanding of Global Competition Authorities: Our Antitrust/Competition attorneys have held significant senior leadership positions within the FTC, DOJ Antitrust Division, and the European Commission, including Director, FTC's Bureau of Competition; Deputy Assistant Attorney General, DOJ Antitrust Division; and Head of Food and Pharmaceuticals, EC Competition Directorate General.
-
Strategic Resolution of Complex and Challenging Engagements: Pharmaceutical, medical device, and biotechnology companies come to Arnold & Porter to handle their most complex, challenging transactions, investigations, antitrust litigation, and counseling issues.
-
Comprehensive Coverage: Our Antitrust/Competition team provides solutions for the full range of U.S. and EU antitrust issues in the life sciences sector, including mergers and joint ventures, cartels and other horizontal agreements, exclusionary conduct, patent enforcement and settlement agreements, rebating and brand for generic agreements, REMS issues and other agreements with suppliers and distributors, the IP-antitrust interface, and abusive conduct by dominant firms in the EU.
Antitrust Firm of the Year (2019)
Experience Highlights
-
Abbvie in its $63 billion acquisition of Allergan, the manufacturer of the well-known medication Botox. The Wall Street Journal reported that this was one of the biggest mergers in the healthcare sector in the year it was announced.
-
Monsanto Company in obtaining US and EU competition clearances for the company's $66 billion acquisition by Bayer, as well as coordinated antitrust/competition approvals in almost 30 other jurisdictions worldwide.
-
Bristol-Myers Squibb in its $90 billion acquisition of Celgene and the related $13.4 billion divesture of Celgene's OTEZLA® program to Amgen.
-
Boston Scientific in its $4.2 billion acquisition of BTG plc, before the German FCO and other competition authorities worldwide.
-
Pfizer in its $43 billion acquisition of Seagen Inc., a world-leader in antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs).
-
Numerous pharmaceutical companies in FTC investigations relating to issues such as patent infringement litigation settlements, alleged competitive issues with distribution systems, product hopping, and price gouging.
-
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Novartis Corporation and Novartis AG in obtaining early and cost-effective dismissal of all third-party-payor health plans' claims that Novartis brought so-called "sham" litigation to enforce patents in an effort to impede generic competition for Gleevec®. Our team also persuaded the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit to affirm the decision. United Food and Commercial Workers Unions and Employers Midwest Health Benefits Fund, et al. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, et al.
-
Bausch Health Companies in an antitrust class action alleging that the settlement of a patent litigation between Bausch's predecessor and a potential generic competitor resulted in the delay of generic competition. Glumetza Antitrust Litigation.
-
Pharmaceutical manufacturer in wholesaler (direct purchaser) and third-party-payor (indirect purchaser) class actions consolidated by state attorneys general into multidistrict litigation, in which plaintiffs allege that the company conspired with several other generic drug makers to increase prices of a number of different generic drugs, creams, lotions, and ointments. In Re Generic Pharmaceuticals Pricing Antitrust Litigation.
-
Pfizer and Warner-Lambert against claims brought by the state of Louisiana that Pfizer and Warner-Lambert delayed the introduction of generic versions of Neurontin® by bringing alleged "sham" litigation to enforce patents, causing the state Medicaid Agency to overpay for branded Neurontin®, allegedly in violation of Louisiana anti-monopoly and other laws. State of Louisiana v. Pfizer Inc. and Warner-Lambert Company, LLC.
Key Contacts
Related Services
