Merck Sharp's guest appearances

Merck Sharp

Teleforum

U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Announcements

Audio Arguendo

Patent Cases

Progress, Potential, and Possibilities

The Supreme Court: Oral Arguments

Gill v. Whitford

McCoy v. Louisiana

Mathena v. Malvo

Hernandez v. Mesa

Kisor v. Wilkie

Benisek v. Lamone

Encino Motorcars

Collins v. Virginia

Allen v. Cooper

Egbert v. Boule

Bucklew v. Precythe

Biestek v. Berryhill

Henry Schein

Daniel Cameron

John Marshall

OwlTail

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitAppeal number:2018-2133Issue: Whether the PTAB's decision declining to find a claim unpatentable as obvious should be upheld.Merck Sharp &amp; Dohme Corp. v. Wyeth LLCDisclaimer: PatentCases is a non-for-profit podcast channel that republishes freely available recordings related to U.S. patent cases. PatentCases does not have any right in the audio files being re-shared.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitAppeal number:2018-2133Issue: Whether the PTAB's decision declining to find a claim unpatentable as obvious should be upheld.Merck Sharp &amp; Dohme Corp. v. Wyeth LLCDisclaimer: PatentCases is a non-for-profit podcast channel that republishes freely available recordings related to U.S. patent cases. PatentCases does not have any right in the audio files being re-shared.

(CAFC 2019-11-07) Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Wyeth LLC

Federalism: Is a state-law failure-to-warn claim preempted when the FDA rejected the drug manufacturer’s proposal to warn about the same risk? - Argued: Mon, 07 Jan 2019 13:39:42 EDT

U.S. Supreme Court Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, Case No. 17-290

In Merck Sharp &amp; Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, the Supreme Court has been asked to clarify the nature of the evidence defendants must produce to demonstrate that state law tort claims are preempted by federal law and whether such questions may be submitted to a jury.  The Third Circuit rejected defendants’ contention that preemption was a purely legal issue for the court to decide and suggested that defendants must demonstrate that there is a “high probability” that the FDA would have rejected stronger labeling for a pharmaceutical product in order to invoke preemption. Doug Smith will attend the oral argument and then join us to discuss his thoughts on the proceedings.Featuring: Douglas G. Smith, P.C., Partner, Kirkland &amp; Ellis LLP Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up on our website. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

In Merck Sharp &amp; Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, the Supreme Court has been asked to clarify the nature of the evidence defendants must produce to demonstrate that state law tort claims are preempted by federal law and whether such questions may be submitted to a jury. The Third Circuit rejected defendants’ contention that preemption was a purely legal issue for the court to decide and suggested that defendants must demonstrate that there is a “high probability” that the FDA would have rejected stronger labeling for a pharmaceutical product in order to invoke preemption. Doug Smith will attend the oral argument and then join us to discuss his thoughts on the proceedings. Featuring: Douglas G. Smith, P.C., Partner, Kirkland &amp; Ellis LLP Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up on our website. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

Courthouse Steps Oral Argument: Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht