Thursday, March 7, 2024

[U] Merck v. Merck: Likely Multi-Billion Dollar Name Litigation -- Grinding Slowly To A Trial Date, In The New Jersey Federal Courts.


Updated -- at midday -- do see this one. The logo mavens are invited to offer their rebrands, if they dare. Smile -- end, updated portion.

As we most recently mentioned just a week ago, it seems the settlement talks in this high stakes name fight have hit an impasse. So now this long running case (with satellite cases dotting the globe -- in Japan, the EU, Britain and various South American geographies, to name just a few) is being served up, on a final trial prep calendar.

The trial proper, is not likely to begin much before early 2025 -- and, of course -- we may yet see settlement talks resume. Here's the latest, though:

. . .TEXT ORDER:

The protocol for in limine motions is as follows: At the outset, each side will be allowed to file a maximum of three in limine motions. Each in limine motion will be filed as its own application, and not as part of a larger omnibus motion.

The maximum page limits are as follows: moving brief-15 double-spaced pages; opposition brief-15 double-spaced pages; reply brief-7 double-spaced pages. However, any in limine motion challenging Philip Green and/or Dr. Dominique Hanssens shall be limited to moving brief-30 double-spaced pages, opposition-30 double-spaced pages, reply-15 double-spaced pages.

The parties will not file the motions until they are fully briefed, at which time the entire set of motion papers shall be filed. Accordingly, the movant shall serve, but not file, all moving papers on the adversary by May 3, 2024. The opposing party will serve, but not file, the opposition papers by June 3, 2024. On or before June 24, 2024, the movant will file all papers in support, opposition, and in reply, for the motion with the Clerk of Court.

No further in limine motions may be filed without leave of the Court, which application shall not be made before the Court has resolved the motions authorized by this Order.

So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Michael A. Hammer on 3/6/2024. . . .


I think the two experts -- named, and linked -- above, will testify on ongoing US and global marketplace effects, and whether confusion is evident in the minds of customers, suppliers, shareholders and providers; as well as whether intellectual property laws are being bent (or broken) here -- and whether they (or the Lanham Act) fashion a workable remedy.

Now you know -- and yes, I think Mr. Biden will win populist “hearts & minds” tonight, by announcing an expanded push to use market incentives to reduce average selling prices of life-saving meds, as well as a new “billionaires’ taxes” scheme. Onward then, into the Thursday morning sunshine. . . grin.

नमस्ते

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

oh..settle this for crying out loud. US Merck should go with the merger title from S/P~~~SMERCK.

Have a great day~

condor said...

Thanks! Heh!

You too -- and as you only too well know, I would love it, if this became the new logo, if US Merck were to lose on its Lanham Act claims:

https://shearlingsplowed.blogspot.com/2020/11/from-way-back-machine-12-years-ago-this.html

But honestly, I think it is German Merck who is most likely to lose in this one. If so, maybe they just re-brand as "That German Family Name That's Made Medicines For Nearly 500 Years Now."

But maybe that's... too-pithy?!

We shall see. . . onward!

Thanks for your great input -- now and always!

Namaste. . . .

condor said...

And now -- because "nothing exceeds. . . like excess!". . .

See the newest post!

Namaste. . . .