|
|
|
Pozen says Texas court upholds Treximet patents
Headline Legal News |
2011/08/09 09:24
|
Drug developer Pozen Inc. said Monday that a Texas court upheld three patents supporting its migraine drug Treximet.
Pozen said the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas ruled that the patents were valid. The court also found that generic versions of Treximet developed by Par Pharmaceutical Co. and Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd. infringed on all three patents, while a version developed by Alphapharm Pty Ltd. infringed on two patents. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. had also challenged the patents, but was dismissed from Pozen's lawsuit in April 2010 after it agreed to abide by the court's decision.
The court said the Food and Drug Administration cannot approve the generics made by Dr. Reddy's and Par until Feb. 2, 2025, and that the agency can't approve the Alphapharm generic until Aug. 14, 2017.
Treximet is a combination of GlaxoSmithKline PLC's drug Imitrex and an anti-inflammatory drug developed by Pozen. GlaxoSmithKline markets the drug and pays royalties to Pozen. In the second quarter, those royalty payments accounted for $4 million of Pozen's $4.6 million in total revenue.
The FDA approved Treximet in April 2008 after years of delays, and Par filed for approval of its generic in October of that year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bank of America starts overdraft rebate outreach
Headline Legal News |
2011/08/08 09:24
|
If you had a Bank of America account with a debit card between January 2001 and May of this year, you may be due some cash.
The nation's largest bank has started contacting customers who may be entitled to a refund. It recently reached a class-action settlement over the way it charged overdraft fees. Most of the other suits are continuing to work their way through federal court in Florida.
Bank of America agreed to set up a $410 million fund to settle the lawsuit. The money will be used to pay back customers who were charged overdraft fees as a result of the company's policy of processing debit card transactions based on the size of the transaction, rather than when the purchases occurred.
The bank is one of about three dozen named in a series of class-action lawsuits over the practice of "reordering." A policy that became widespread in the 2000s, reordering involves deducting purchases from an account starting with the largest dollar amount first. That means a customer may end up paying additional overdraft fees.
For instance, someone with an account balance of $95 and who made three purchases in one day, the first for $5, the next for $25 and the last for $75, would be charged two overdraft fees, rather than one.
The suits claim that reordering was done to intentionally increase the number of overdraft fees collected. Banks took in about $39 billion in overdraft fees annually before the Federal Reserve put new rules in place last year. Now banks are required to obtain a customer's written permission before providing overdraft protection.
To inform customers that they may be eligible for a refund of some overdraft fees, Bank of America is sending postcards to customers with a brief explanation of the settlement and the address of a website where more information is available.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kansas workers seek to bar immigration questions
Headline Legal News |
2011/08/03 08:43
|
Workers who filed a class-action lawsuit against a Kansas slaughterhouse for unpaid wages and overtime have asked a federal judge to bar Creekstone Farms Premium Beef from discovering their immigration status during the litigation.
The employees have asked U.S. District Judge Eric Melgren for a protective order prohibiting the Arkansas City meatpacker from receiving from the named plaintiffs — or any other workers who opt into the lawsuit — any information pertaining to their present names or any other names they may have used.
They also seek to avoid having to disclose their place of birth, Social Security number and any present or prior addresses. The plaintiff's motion also seeks an order protecting the workers from having to turn over to Creekstone Farms any tax returns or any other tax forms filed under any of their identities or having to disclose the dates and times of entry into the United States. They also want to avoid turning over all identification documents likely to lead to the discovery of their immigration status.
Their attorney, Mark Kistler, told The Associated Press Tuesday that the courts already have decided that these types of information which could lead to discovery of immigration status should be protected from discovery during a lawsuit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State Supreme Court rules on illegal taxes
Headline Legal News |
2011/08/01 09:00
|
The state Supreme Court made it easier this week for California taxpayers to seek refunds from cities and counties, ruling that a claim of an illegal local tax can be pursued as a class action on behalf of everyone who was overcharged.
The unanimous decision Monday in a Los Angeles case overturned lower-court rulings requiring local taxpayers to file individual refund claims.
In a class action, a representative can win damages that are distributed to an entire group of people affected by the same unlawful action. Class-action status often determines whether a tax can be effectively challenged, said Paul Heidenreich, a lawyer for consumer organizations in the case.
"When only one person can sue at a time, there's little incentive to do so" with small amounts at stake, he said.
The ruling may not affect San Francisco, however. Deputy City Attorney Peter Keith said the city has ordinances that set rules for tax refund claims and prohibit class actions. He said the court allowed class-wide suits only when a city or county has no laws of its own regulating tax refunds.
Francis Gregorek, lawyer for the plaintiff in the Los Angeles case, said a future ruling may be needed to determine whether a city can shield itself from class actions.
Class actions have become a hotly contested legal battleground. The U.S. Supreme Court restricted their use in two California cases earlier this year, refusing to allow as many as 1.5 million women to sue Wal-Mart Stores Inc. as a group over pay and promotion practices, and rejecting class-wide arbitration of a cell phone customer's overcharge claim against AT&T.
Gregorek's client, Estuardo Ardon, sued Los Angeles in 2006, claiming that a city telephone tax was illegal because it was linked to a federal excise tax that had been ruled invalid. Gregorek said the suit seeks millions of dollars in refunds for all phone customers in the city and has led to challenges against similar taxes in other communities.
The case has remained on hold while state courts determined whether Ardon can represent other customers. An appellate court said he could sue only as an individual, citing the state Supreme Court's 1992 ruling that rejected class-action status for a challenge to the state's taxes on vehicles bought by Californians in other states.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calif Supreme Court rules on illegal local taxes
Headline Legal News |
2011/07/26 09:11
|
Ruling in a Los Angeles case, the California Supreme Court has ruled taxpayers can file class-action claims when seeking refunds from cities and counties for illegal local taxes.
Monday's unanimous ruling overturns lower-court rulings requiring taxpayers to file individual refund claims.
In class action claims, an individual can win damages for an entire group of people affected by the same unlawful action.
The San Francisco Chronicle says Estuardo Ardon sued the city of Los Angeles in 2006, claiming a city telephone tax was illegal because it was linked to a federal excise tax that had been ruled invalid. The suit seeks millions of dollars in refunds for all phone customers in the city.
But the case has remained on hold while state courts determined whether Ardon can represent a group.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Investment Fraud Litigation |
|
|
|
|
Securities fraud, also known as stock fraud and investment fraud, is a practice that induces investors to make purchase or sale decisions on the basis of false information, frequently resulting in losses, in violation of the securities laws. Securities Arbitration. Generally speaking, securities fraud consists of deceptive practices in the stock and commodity markets, and occurs when investors are enticed to part with their money based on untrue statements.
|
|
|
| |
| |
| |
|
The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Securities Law News as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case. | Affordable Law Firm Website Design by Law Promo |
|
Legal News RSS Feed
