Lawyers at Munger, Tolles & Olson; Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; and White & Case scored another victory on Friday in long-running litigation over a so-called pay-for-delay deal involving the testosterone replacement gel AndroGel. U.S. District Judge Thomas Thrash Jr. in Atlanta granted defense motions for summary judgment, rejecting arguments by AndroGel purchasers that a 2003 patent settlement between Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc., Paddock Laboratories Inc., Par Pharmaceuticals Companies Inc., and Solvay Pharmaceuticals Inc. was based on “sham” litigation.
Solvay, which began marketing AndroGel in June 2000, was issued a patent for the gel in January 2003, according to court records. After Watson and Paddock Laboratories (in partnership with Par) began developing generic version of the gel, a Solvay subsidiary filed a patent infringement suit in August 2003 to block the generics. The parties reached a settlement the same year, which included “reverse payments” from Solvay and an agreement by its rivals to promote AndroGel and to forgo plans for a generic version until at least August 2015. The Federal Trade Commission and class action lawyers filed antitrust claims against all four pharmaceutical companies in 2009, claiming that the 2003 deal was anticompetitive and that the underlying patent litigation was a sham.
