Expert Analysis

• What 2024 Election Means For Drugs, Medicare And Medicaid

  

  With Republicans running the White House, U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate, the incoming administration is likely to provide pathways — through new initiatives and others returning from Trump's previous presidency — for a range of potential changes to drug pricing, Medicare and Medicaid, say attorneys at Morgan Lewis.

• Think Like A Lawyer: 1 Type Of Case Complexity Stands Out

  

  In contrast to some cases that appear complex due to voluminous evidence or esoteric subject matter, a different kind of complexity involves tangled legal and factual questions, each with a range of possible outcomes, which require a “sliding scale” approach instead of syllogistic reasoning, says Luke Andrews at Poole Huffman.

• What Bisphenol S Prop 65 Listing Will Mean For Industry

  

  The imminent addition of bisphenol S — a chemical used in millions of products — to California's Proposition 65 list will have sweeping compliance and litigation implications for companies in the retail, food and beverage, paper, manufacturing and personal care product industries, say attorneys at Alston & Bird.

• Fed. Circ. Ruling Shows Importance Of Trial Expert Specificity

  

  The Federal Circuit’s recent ruling in NexStep v. Comcast highlights how even a persuasive expert’s failure to fully explain the basis of their opinion at trial can turn a winning patent infringement argument into a losing one, say attorneys at Barnes & Thornburg.

• Think Like A Lawyer: Note 3 Simple Types Of Legal Complexity

  

  Cases can appear complex for several reasons — due to the number of issues, the volume of factual and evidentiary sources, and the sophistication of those sources — but the same basic technique can help lawyers tame their arguments into a simple and persuasive message, says Luke Andrews at Poole Huffman.

• Justices Mull Sex-Based Classification In Trans Law Case

  

  After the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in U.S. v. Skrmetti this week, it appears that the fate of the Tennessee law at the center of the case — a law banning gender-affirming healthcare for transgender adolescents — will hinge on whether the majority read the statute as imposing a sex-based classification, says Alexandra Crandall at Dickinson Wright.

• Series

  Gardening Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Beyond its practical and therapeutic benefits, gardening has bolstered important attributes that also apply to my litigation practice, including persistence, patience, grit and authenticity, says Christopher Viceconte at Gibbons.

• Litigation Inspiration: Reframing Document Review

  

  For attorneys — new ones especially — there is much fulfillment to find in document review by reflecting on how important, interesting and pleasant it can be, says Bennett Rawicki at Hilgers Graben.

• Key Takeaways From FDA's Latest Social Media Warnings

  

  The U.S. Food and Drug Administration's latest untitled letter concerning a drug company's social media promotion provides lessons for how companies should navigate risk presentation, FDA labeling requirements and superiority claims, say attorneys at Sheppard Mullin.

• Expect More State Scrutiny Of PE In Healthcare M&A

  

  While a California bill that called for increased antitrust scrutiny of many healthcare private equity transactions was recently vetoed by the governor, state legislatures are likely to continue introducing similar laws, particularly if the Trump administration eases federal enforcement, say attorneys at Morgan Lewis.

• Declaring Unexpected Results: Pitfalls For Rule 132 At PTAB

  

  Rule 132 declarations are frequently used in life sciences patent prosecution for rebutting obviousness rejections by establishing that an applicant's invention produces unexpected results, and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's Eidschun ruling highlights when this important tool may be ineffective, say attorneys at Morrison Foerster.

• IP Ruling Likely To Limit Arguments Against Qualified Experts

  

  The Federal Circuit's recent decision in Osseo v. Planmeca, clarifying when experts may offer testimony from the perspective of a skilled artisan, provides helpful guidance on expert qualifications and could quash future timing arguments regarding declarants' expertise, says Whitney Jenkins at Marshall Gerstein.

• How Boards And Officers Should Prep For New Trump Admin

  

  In anticipation of President-elect Donald Trump's proposed tariffs and mass deportation campaign, company officers and board members should pursue proactive, comprehensive contingency planning to not only advance the best interests of the companies they serve, but to also properly exercise their fiduciary duty of care, say attorneys at Winston & Strawn.

• Dissecting The Obviousness-Type Double Patenting Debate

  

  The Federal Circuit's recent decision in Allergan v. MSN highlights the ongoing evolution of the obviousness-type double patenting doctrine, revealing increasing tension between expiration-based interpretations and procedural flexibility, says Jeremy Lowe at Leydig Voit.

• Service Providers Must Mitigate 'Secondary Target' Risks

  

  A lawsuit recently filed in an Illinois federal court against marketing agency Publicis over its work for opioid manufacturers highlights an uptick in litigation against professional service providers hired by clients that engaged in alleged misconduct — so potential targets of such suits should be sure to conduct proper risk analysis and mitigation, say attorneys at Dechert.