Instead, I will re-run one, from July 2018 -- that highlights all that's wrong with Mr. Saunders' [an ardent "Fast" Fred Hassan acolyte, he] view of the industry and its public obligations, though -- right here:
In a local blog power-alley update -- we've been covering this case for around two years, and covering Allergan's CEO for around a decade, since his former role at Schering-Plough, under Fast Fred Hassan. [So this ill-considered evasive move came as no surprise, to us. And now -- it has met a bad end -- after Allergan spent upwards of $10 million in legal fees, chasing it.]
Just as we predicted -- pre-, and post-trial -- Brenton Saunders has been shown the gate, on an illogical attempt to transfer Allergan IP to a native peoples' tribe, in the now vain hope of invoking the doctrine of sovereign immunity generally applicable to that nation, to avoid USPTO inter partes review (and a likely loss of patent rights). That has now occurred anyway.
PhRMA had also written a brief back in January, but it traversed largely unremarkable ground. Now the Federal Circuit panel has found against the nutty Saunders gambit. His transaction had no legitimate commercial purpose, other than to circumvent the US patent laws. It's a well-reasoned 25 page PDF of an apellate decision -- and here's a bit:
. . . .The Director’s important role as a gatekeeper and the Board’s authority to proceed in the absence of the parties convinces us that the USPTO is acting as the United States in its role as a superior sovereign to reconsider a prior administrative grant and protect the public interest in keeping patent monopolies “within their legitimate scope.” See Cuozzo, 136 S. Ct. at 2144. The United States, through the Director, does “exercise. . . political responsibility” over the decision to proceed with IPR. FMC, 535 U.S. at 764 (quoting Alden, 527 U.S. at 756).
The Tribe may not rely on its immunity to bar such an action. See Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Fla. v. United States, 698 F.3d 1326, 1331 (11th Cir. 2012) (“Indian tribes may not rely on tribal sovereign immunity to bar a suit by a superior sovereign.”). Because we conclude that tribal sovereign immunity cannot be asserted in IPR, we need not reach the parties’ other arguments. . . .
Longer term readers will recall that Mr. Saunders felt it was "un-American" to expect that US companies should pay. . . wait for it. . . US taxes (even as they purported to invert -- as he and Ian Read of Pfizer attempted -- and failed, three years ago now).
Travel light -- and travel well. I'm out. . . .
"Сделаем Америку снова великой!" Or, if you need a translation from the Russian: "Makз дмзяicа Gязaт дgaiй, Coмяadз." Thanks Cheetolini.
नमस्ते
No comments:
Post a Comment