Through our litigation webinar series we bring our litigation practice’s deep experience in a multitude of US forums – from the International Trade Commission to the Delaware Court of Chancery to the Eastern District of Texas, and more – straight to you. Join us as we explore cases and trends shaping the legal landscape, and provide a window into the ways we think about information and intelligence to formulate crucial litigation strategies.
Next Steps for Next Gen: Practical Ways to Empower Younger, Diverse Lawyers
The successful administration of justice hinges on the quality of advocates who are able to zealously advocate for their clients and protect legal rights in court. As trial opportunities continue to dwindle, the judiciary has begun to issue orders that deliberately and methodically encourage greater opportunities for junior lawyers to gain courtroom experience. Fish, along with ChIPs and the Federal Circuit Bar Association, has launched the Next Gen Lawyers website, which serves as a forum to address these issues and to ensure that the overall quality of advocacy remains top-notch.
Nationally, attorneys need to be considering the question: how can we best position rising professionals for success? These issues will affect all attorneys, whether in law firms or corporate legal departments, and it is important to level the playing field for all junior lawyers. Join Betty Chen, James Huguenin-Love, and Emily Petersen Garff as they discuss:
Challenges faced by young and diverse attorneys
Techniques for aiding success
Role of the judiciary
If you have an interest in the Next Gen Lawyers initiative, this webinar is for you.
LITIGATION WEBINAR REPLAYS
Enhanced Damages in Patent Cases After Halo v. Pulse Electronics
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the Seagate test for increased damages is not consistent with Section 284 of the Patent Act, holding that a district court has discretion to enhance damages in “egregious” cases, such as where the defendant’s infringement is subjectively willful, without regard to whether the infringement was objectively reckless.
Join Fish attorney Craig Countryman, who represented Halo in the Supreme Court, for a webinar to discuss the significance of this ruling and learn about:
The background of Halo and the Supreme Court’s holding
The unresolved legal issues that remain after the Supreme Court’s decision
The likely impact of Halo, if any, on NPE litigation
Whether (and when) defendants would now be advised to seek opinions of counsel, given the Supreme Court’s new standard
If you have an interest in appellate or patent litigation, this webinar is for you. Fish & Richardson will apply for 1.0 hour of general CLE credit in most states.
Patent Litigation for the Non-Specialist: How It Works and What to Expect
The prospect of suing or being sued for patent infringement can be daunting, particularly for those without prior experience. Like other forms of business litigation, patent infringement lawsuits are often complex undertakings, with many moving parts. Patent cases may be particularly challenging because they often involve intricate technology, entail unique litigation procedures, and raise difficult legal issues.Join Fish & Richardson principals Jolynn Lussier, Adam Kessel and Lawrence Kolodney as they discuss how patent infringement litigation works, and what a patent lawsuit might mean for your business. This complimentary webinar will address:
Basic patent law concepts
The life cycle of a patent infringement case
Some strategic and tactical considerations for patent owners and accused infringers
Whether you are a corporate decision-maker or a newcomer to IP litigation, this webinar will help you gain a greater understanding about how patent litigation works and what to expect as a case progresses.
Beyond the Basics - Understanding and Maximizing Enforcement of Your Trade Secrets in the Global Age
This webinar will focus on the latest strategies for trade secrets protection, with a particular focus on the Defend Trade Secrets Act and international enforcement options.
Join Fish & Richardson attorneys Thomas Frongillo, and Caroline Simons on Wednesday, May 18, to get insight into some of the recent trends and developments in trade secret law, including:
The Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA). It’s finally here. How does this much-anticipated statute change the landscape? What new options does the DTSA give companies to protect their trade secrets? What considerations should in-house counsel make when contemplating bringing a lawsuit, and what changes to company policy should be made right away in response to the new law?
International trade secret enforcement. What are the trends in civil and criminal enforcement when it comes to international trade secret theft, including the government’s increased use of the Economic Espionage Act (EEA) to protect U.S. business interests? How has the U.S. worked in cooperation with foreign governments (e.g., China, Europe) on trade secret enforcement, and what cross-border developments should companies know about?
Wielding the EEA. What lessons can we learn from recent, high-profile criminal EEA prosecutions? What complications will you face pursuing a civil case if the government is proceeding in parallel with a criminal prosecution? And conversely, what should companies do if a new employee walks in the door with another’s trade secrets?
Arbitration. There are pros and pitfalls of arbitration when it comes to trade secret protection specifically. In light of recent developments in this area, how can companies avoid unintended consequences of common oversights in arbitration clauses?
If you have an interest in the Defend Trade Secrets Act, the Economic Espinoage Act, trade secrets enforcement, or intellectual property issues, you won’t want to miss this complimentary webinar.
Patent Damages: The Success and Failure of a Theory
As we learned in our last patent damages webinar, patent damages are part of every patent infringement case. Not all damages theories succeed. The district courts have been scrutinizing apportionment approaches, use of comparable licenses and extraterritorial issues. Recent court decisions, however, tell us that patent damages can be presented at trial, even without a damages expert or an opinion on the damages amount.
Cyberattack: Quarterbacking the Company's Response to the Most Sophisticated Threats
Given the pervasiveness and sophistication of today’s cyberattacks, companies may be tempted to declare this a battle not worth fighting. But there are important reasons to resist. Good corporate strategy and policymaking – emanating not from the server room, but from the boardroom – keep the most inevitable cyberattack from becoming a disaster for the company.
Our INSIGHTS webinar will feature Gus Coldebella and Thomas Frongillo, who have both been in the trenches of large scale cyber responses and know what separates a distraction from a disaster. The webinar will discuss:
What measures can counsel take to ward off and mitigate the effects of such attacks?
What regulatory regimes apply?
What can we do to minimize the secondary effects of such attacks, including litigation, regulatory scrutiny, and reputational hits?
What government resources are available if your company is the victim?
What is the appropriate role of the company’s senior management and the board of directors?
If you have an interest in cybersecurity, this complimentary webinar is for you.
In the absence of legislation, the Federal Circuit and district courts took on the job of patent damages reform. After the Federal Circuit handed down numerous damages opinions in the late 2000s and early 2010s, many thought the pace would slow, but that has not been the case. The court has continued its efforts to make and clarify damages law. The district courts, too, have been active in this area, cracking down on damages experts and stiffening the requirements to qualify damages theories for trial.
Join our webinar to hear Chris Marchese, author of the Patent Damages blog, address how key courts and litigants are handling patent damages issues. The webinar will focus on:
Apportionment and its pitfalls
Damages from foreign activity
Developments in lost profits law
Daubert and MIL trends
If you have an interest in patent damages or patent litigation, this complimentary webinar is for you.
Recent Supreme Court decisions on intellectual property law have changed the world in which IP attorneys work, and the Court shows no sign of slowing down. You likely know the facts and general holdings of recent decisions on indefiniteness, patent eligibility, divided infringement, and claim construction, for example. But have you thought harder about how the decisions may play out in the coming years for your practice – extending into obvious and not-so-obvious areas? This presentation will review the holdings and provide useful advice for prosecutors, litigators, and transactional attorneys.
Patent Infringement Litigation in the Eastern District of Texas
The Eastern District of Texas remains one of the busiest districts in the country for patent infringement litigation. Few districts are more frequently called on to address the Supreme Court’s recent patent law decisions, the effect of co-pending IPR and CBM proceedings at the Patent Office, and legislative reforms. Even with these changes, the Eastern District of Texas continues to see frequent trials and trials that occur relatively sooner than most districts.
Please join Fish attorneys, Leonard Davis, former Chief Judge of the Eastern District of Texas, to discuss patent infringement litigation in the Eastern District of Texas, including:
Interesting statistics for the Eastern District of Texas
Trends related to the Supreme Court decisions and legislative reforms
New procedures being tested and implemented
Effective advocacy to get the Court’s attention on new and old issues
Ineffective advocacy that gets the Court’s attention on anything
If you have an interest in intellectual property or patent litigation, this complimentary webinar is for you.
Appeals from IPRs: Making the Most of Post-Grant Proceedings
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is often the last stop on the line for a patent owner and petitioner battling over patentability. In many cases, the Federal Circuit’s determination results in not just a single battle victory-but one that ends the war between both sides. This webinar will address not only the positioning required to maintain the status quo in a petitioner’s PTAB win, but also the pre-appeal considerations of which every patent owner should be aware in preparing a record for a likely appellate trip to the Federal Circuit.
Join John Dragseth and Lauren Degnan as they examine the early record of Federal Circuit determinations on PTAB post-grant appeals. You can expect their discussion to address:
Leveraging and preparing for the standard of review of PTAB determinations by the Federal Circuit
Arguing PTAB appeals
The Federal Circuit’s use of “Rule 36” in PTAB Appeals
Post-appeal issues regarding remand to the PTAB
If you have an interest in intellectual property, appellate case law or post-grant proceedings, this complimentary webinar is for you.
Alice and Octane Fitness: Patent Reform in the Federal Judiciary
The past year saw significant decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and various district courts that have impacted the rate of and risk associated with patent lawsuits brought by non-practicing entities. For example, the Supreme Court’s decision in Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International refined the permissible scope of patent eligible subject matter. As a result, defendants increasingly attack validity under 35 U.S.C. § 101 earlier in patent litigations and with increasing success. Moreover, in Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness Inc., the Supreme Court relaxed the standard for awarding attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 for “exceptional” cases and lowered the evidentiary burden to establish an exceptional case. Octane Fitness thus increases the risk of fee shifting in questionable lawsuits.
Join Ahmed Davis and Steve Marshall, principals at Fish & Richardson, as they discuss these changes and others impacting the frequency and scope of patent litigation. You can also expect this webinar to address:
The dramatic increase in Section 101 challenges
The change in grant rate for motions based on Section 101 following Alice
The Alice effect in the Patent & Trademark Office
Octane Fitness‘s totality of circumstances inquiry
Potential intersection of Alice and Octane Fitness
Pending legislation that may impact the issues above
If you have an interest in patent litigation, intellectual property (IP) rights, or IP litigation, this complimentary webinar is for you.
Patent litigation involving nonpracticing entities (NPEs) appears to have dropped significantly over the past year. The combination of the Supreme Court’s recent decisions in Alice and other cases, the explosive growth of Patent Office trials, and the specter of legislative reform appear to have weakened the desire of NPEs to file suit in district court. Has this triple whammy put NPEs down for the count?
Recent Developments Impacting Hatch-Waxman Litigation - March 2015
The past year saw significant decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and various district courts that impact Hatch-Waxman practice. As one example, the Supreme Court’s decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman has complicated the issue of personal jurisdiction in Hatch-Waxman lawsuits. Moreover, in Commil v. Cisco, the Supreme Court is considering whether a good faith belief in patent invalidity negates inducement under section 271(b).
Join Jon Singer and Brian Coggio, principals at Fish & Richardson, as they discuss noteworthy decisions from 2014. You can also expect this webinar to address:
Personal jurisdiction in Hatch-Waxman litigation
Good faith belief in invalidity to negate inducement
Obviousness in view of Bristol’s Baraclude decision
Drug labels as inducing infringement
Sham litigation and the recent Tyco decision
IPRs and their potential impact on Hatch-Waxman litigation
If you are affiliated with the life sciences or pharmaceutical industries, or have an interest in Intellectual Property (IP) rights or IP litigation, this complimentary webinar is for you.
Learn more about Fish’s experience with Hatch-Waxman at fr.com.
Practical Considerations for Accessing the ITC - February 2015
Many companies wonder whether the International Trade Commission (ITC) is the appropriate forum for their intellectual property (IP) cases. With recent changes to ITC Section 337 practice and procedure, the law has made bringing a complaint in the ITC easier in some ways, and more difficult in others.
Join The Honorable Theodore R. Essex, Administrative Law Judge with the ITC, and Richard Sterbaand Andrew Kopsidas, Principals at Fish & Richardson, as they discuss:
The future of patent infringement claims based on indirect infringement and method claims,
What it takes to meet the domestic industry requirement when the asserted patent is part of a portfolio, and
Asserting non-patent intellectual property rights in an ITC investigation.
If you have an interest in international trade, intellectual property-based imports, patents, IP rights, or IP litigation, you won’t want to miss this complimentary webinar.
Learn more about Fish’s experience in the ITC onfr.com.
2014 Patent Litigation Year in Review - January 2015
2014 saw significant cases from both the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in patent law. Addressing issues such as patent eligibility, definiteness, and attorneys’ fees, the Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit in the last term. Since then, the Federal Circuit has begun interpreting and applying the Court’s decisions. The Federal Circuit has also been active in matters of procedure, damages, and appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Join Fish & Richardson’s John DragsethandLauren Degnanas they discuss noteworthy cases from 2014. You can expect this webinar to address:
Claim construction and indefiniteness
Bringing and maintaining patent infringement suits
Granted petitions for certiorari and hearing en banc
If you have an interest in IP litigation, patents, or post-grant proceedings, you won’t want to miss this complimentary webinar.
The Highest Duty Known to Law . . . Fiduciary Liability in the 21st Century - November 2014
The timeless fiduciary obligations of loyalty, trust, and candor are found in many settings – not only lawyers but also employees, partners, corporate officers/directors/majority shareholders, trustees, receivers, agents, brokers, and financial advisers are all held to the standard of fiduciaries under certain circumstances. Tommy Jacks will discuss fiduciary liability in its various contexts and provide an update covering the latest developments in key jurisdictions. You can expect this webinar to address:
Traditional fiduciary relationships and duties
Finding fiduciary duties and liability in unexpected places
Fiduciary duty claims in litigation
Recent developments in key jurisdictions
If you have an interest in fiduciary duty law or commercial litigation, you won’t want to miss this complimentary webinar.
When patent protection falls apart, trade secrets can come through to save the day. How do trade secrets operate as secret weapons?
Join Tommy Jacks of Fish & Richardson for an interactive discussion and unique perspective on trade secrets. You can expect this webinar to explore:
Why trade secrets matter more today than ever before;
The top things you may not know about protecting your company’s valuable trade secrets;
Recent trends and developments across the country in trade secrets law.
Wednesday, October 15 / 1:00 PM ET / Via the web
If you have an interest in trade secret law, business litigation, intellectual property, or cyber security, you won’t want to miss this webinar.
The Supreme Court’s Past Year and Coming Year – How They Will Affect Your Day-to-Day IP Practice - September 2014
Recent Supreme Court decisions on intellectual property law have changed the world in which IP attorneys work, and the Court shows no sign of slowing down. You likely know the facts and general holdings of recent decisions on split infringement, Section 101, indefiniteness, and copyright laches. But have you thought harder about how the decisions may play out in the coming years for your practice – extending into obvious and not-so-obvious areas? This presentation will review the holdings and provide useful advice for prosecutors, litigators, and transactional attorneys.
Fish & Richardson’s John Dragseth has led the briefing on more than 50 appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Join him as he explores the reasoning behind the following Supreme Court decisions and their implications for IP strategy and practice.
POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co. – Lanham Act claims not preempted by FDCA labeling requirements Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. V. CLS Bank Int’l – Emphasizing limits on software claims’ patent eligibility Nautilus v. Biosig – Addressing the standard for invalidating patent claims for indefiniteness Limelight Networks v. Akamai – Eliminating the Federal Circuit’s rationale for split infringement, but leaving open other options for finding infringement by two parties Octane Fitness and Highmark – Changing the standard for awarding attorney fees Petrella v. MGM – Largely eliminating laches as a defense in copyright lawsuits
If you are responsible for enforcing or defending IP for your organization, or have an interest in case developments, you won’t want to miss this complimentary webinar.
Legal Challenges in Digital Health - June 2014
The business and technology of digital health are exploding. Innovations in sensors, apps, and wireless technologies are transforming markets for consumer and healthcare devices. Healthcare providers are embracing the adoption of electronic records and data transfer systems. Advances in genomics and analytics are providing personalized medicine. And social networks are bridging the gap between wellness and healthcare. Such innovations can present a suite of legal issues – including issues of intellectual property, privacy, and regulation – that merit special attention.
Protecting and Defending Intellectual Property and Technology A Delaware Court of Chancery Webinar - March 2014
Intellectual property assets – including patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and other confidential and proprietary information – can account for as much as 80 percent of a company’s total market value. As a result, companies with these assets are increasingly confronted with IP- and technology-related disputes.
In this webinar, Jeremy Anderson, a Principal with Fish & Richardson, discussed how the Delaware Court of Chancery can be used as a tool to protect and defend these important assets.
Addressed why the Delaware Court of Chancery is a leading forum for determining technology-related disputes.
Explained how the Court of Chancery can be used to
Establish the ownership interest in patents,
Prevent the filing of infringement lawsuits,
Create leverage in infringement lawsuits, and
Enforce license agreements and non-compete agreements.
Provided guidance for taking advantage of the Court of Chancery as a tool for protecting your intellectual property.
If you’re responsible for guarding your company’s intellectual property or have fiduciary duties, you will want to watch the replay.
Responding to (and Guarding Against) Trade Secret Theft: Perspectives of Former Federal Prosecutors
Trade secret theft is one of the most difficult security challenges a company must face.
Watch this replay with David Cowen of G-C Partners, a nationally recognized computer forensic expert, and prominent white collar defense attorney and former federal prosecutor Tom Frongillo of Fish & Richardson for their at-issue discussion about a $300 billion affliction to corporate America’s trade secrets.
This panel provided an overview of the Economic Espionage Act and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and discussed strategic considerations every company faces when it is either a victim of trade secret theft or identified as a target of a federal probe.
You can expect this webinar replay to:
Address common issues that arise from the discovery of trade secret violations during an internal investigation or whistleblower tips;
Discuss the pros and cons of reporting violations to the government, from the vantages of both a victim and an alleged wrongdoer;
Explain how companies often face parallel civil and criminal proceedings, and offer strategic advice; and
Provide guidance on what you can do now to protect yourself from trade secret theft and what forensic steps to take if trade secret theft occurs.
If you have an interest in cyber security, economic espionage, or anticorruption or white collar criminal investigations, prosecutions, and case developments, you will want to watch this webinar replay.
David Cowen of G-C Partners Tom Frongillo, Principal, Fish & Richardson
Around the World in 60 Minutes: A Global Update on Recent Anticorruption Enforcement Efforts -
FCPA Impact Webinar with a Special Life Sciences and Pharmaceutical Focus
The rise in high-dollar anticorruption actions has sparked a worldwide interest in enforcement that goes far beyond the FCPA and leaves companies to navigate a swiftly changing landscape of laws and regulations.
During this webinar, Fish’s Principal and prominent white collar defense attorney Tom Frongillo explored key anticorruption trends and developments in various countries. These former federal prosecutors will also identify issues that are particularly important for life sciences and pharmaceutical companies.
Specifically, this webinar discussed the following topics:
New developments under the U.K. Bribery Act, Brazil’s recent anticorruption law, and China’s domestic anti-bribery enforcement;
2013 enforcement efforts from other countries;
A preview of which countries are looking to ramp-up anticorruption efforts in the upcoming year; and
What you can do now to ensure that your compliance program is up to par.
If you oversee fraud investigations or have an interest in anticorruption or white collar criminal investigations, prosecutions, and case developments, this webinar replay is one you want to watch.
The Continuing Evolution of Patent Damages: What You Don’t Know May Hurt You - December 2013
Despite congressional and judicial efforts aimed at reining in patent damages, the law still lacks clarity in many areas. As the courts impose new legal restraints, clever litigants hatch novel damages theories in an effort to skirt those restraints. Today, the world of patent damages continues to evolve: solve one problem (such as the entire market value rule in reasonable royalty cases), and new issues pop up around it. You may feel damages is like a game where you overcome one hurdle, only to have another jump up out of nowhere.
To protect their organization’s intellectual property and business interests, counsel must be aware of the legal question marks, the theories that litigants are using to exploit them, and how to apply the teachings of current case law on damages.
Authoritative litigators and damages bloggers Chris Marchese and Justin Barnes, Principals in Fish’s San Diego office, talked about how key courts and litigants are handling patent damages cases, including the following topics:
Whether the “smallest salable patent-practicing unit” must be apportioned to account for the value of the patented feature.
Techniques for apportioning and their pitfalls.
Theories designed to end-run the entire market value rule.
Legal hurdles to clear in showing a license is comparable.
Speakers: Chris Marchese, Principal, San Diego Justin Barnes, Principal, San Diego
Injunctive Relief for Standard-Essential Patents - November 2013
Fish Principals DJ Healey (Houston) and Andrew Kopsidas (Washington, D.C.) explored the different outcomes reached in several leading forums and how this is shaping patent litigation in the United States based on the recent attention to the question of whether injunctive relief should be permitted when a party is found to infringe a Standard-Essential Patent (SEP).
Both the International Trade Commission and federal district courts have considered the issue and arrived at differing conclusions. The United States Department of Justice Antitrust Division and the United States Patent and Trademark Office have also weighed in on the issue.
Demystifying Appeals from the ITC to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - October 2013
Fish Principals Lauren Degnan (Washington, D.C.) and John Dragseth (Twin Cities), and special guest The Honorable Paul R. Michel, Chief Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Retired), discussed the procedures and strategies that lead to persuasive and effective appeals from the ITC to the Federal Circuit.
In addition to reviewing procedures for preserving issues for appeal and staying an exclusion order pending appeal, the speakers also examined:
The Federal Circuit’s jurisdiction and standard of review
The preclusive effect of an appellate judgment
The complex interplay between private litigants and the ITC’S General Counsel’s office
How the ITC’s strict confidentiality requirements impact an appeal
Speakers: Lauren Degnan, Principal, DC John Dragseth, Principal, Twin Cities
The Honorable Paul R. Michel, Chief Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Retired
Last year, the FDA approved the first biosimilar drug under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) and the courts have recently rendered some important statutory interpretations. This represents the dawn of a new era in the approval and marketing of biologic products.
Join Fish attorneys Tasha Francis and Michael Amon for our fourth presentation in our webinar series focusing on biologics. (Replays of the first, second, and third webinars are available here). This presentation will discuss past, present, and expected litigation in the area, and will focus specifically on the following:
Recent cases and their impact on the biosimilars industry
Last year, the FDA approved the first biosimilar drug under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA), and the courts have recently rendered some important statutory interpretations. This represents the dawn of a new era in the approval and marketing of biologic products. As the popularity of biosimilars grows, biosimilars manufacturers have turned to IPR proceedings to challenge patents covering biologic drugs.
Join Fish attorneys Dorothy Whelan and Brian Coggio for our third presentation in this series. Replays of the first and second webinars are available here. The third presentation will discuss recent developments in this space, including:
A review of biosimilars IPR filings and PTAB decisions to date
Multiple filer/multiple petitions issues and related timing considerations
Biosimilars 102 - Litigation: Planning and Strategy
This year, the FDA approved the first biosimilar drug under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) and the courts have recently rendered some important statutory interpretations. This represents the dawn of a new era in the approval and marketing of biologic products. Join Fish attorneys for a multi-part webinar series designed to help you navigate these yet unsettled waters of dealing with biologic products.
The second webinar in the series will build on the first webinar available here and cover recent court cases related to biologics. Join Fish principals Terry Mahn and Chad Shear as they discuss:
Preparing for litigation
The “Patent Dance”
Strategies that pioneers and biosimilar companies should be implementing now
This series will prove valuable for those already familiar with the BPCIA as well as for those just starting to grapple with its provisions.
This year the FDA approved the first biosimilar drug under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) and the courts have recently rendered some important statutory interpretations. This represents the dawn of a new era in the approval and marketing of biologic products. Join Fish attorneys for a four-part webinar series designed to help you navigate the yet unsettled waters of products.
The series will cover the regulatory framework governing biologics and biosimilars; differences between the BPCIA and Hatch-Waxman in terms of patent protection and litigation; recent BPCIA court cases; and IPR activities related to biologics.
The similarities and differences between biosimilars, interchangeables, and generic drugs
What pioneers and biosimilars should be doing now
This series will prove valuable for those already familiar with the BPCIA as well as for those just starting to grapple with its provisions. If you have an interest in biosimilars, life sciences, or Hatch-Waxman litigation, this complimentary webinar is for you.