AbbVie asks US Supreme Court to weigh protections for attorney records
By Mike Scarcella
July 11 (Reuters) -Pharmaceutical company AbbVie ABBV.N has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take up its fight to protect corporate records, warning that a lower court ruling threatens to erode the shield that keeps most attorney communications off-limits from a company's courtroom opponents.
The Illinois-based drugmaker petitioned the justices this week to review a U.S. appeals court decision that said the filing of a sham patent-infringement lawsuit can overcome attorney-client privilege.
AbbVie is battling allegations in Philadelphia federal court from a group of drug wholesalers that claim they were overcharged for the blockbuster testosterone replacement drug AndroGel.
Purchasers including AmerisourceBergen and McKesson said AbbVie pursued a meritless patent case against drugmaker Perrigo PRGO.N in 2011 to delay its marketing of cheaper generic version of AndroGel.
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in February ruled that AbbVie must turn over to the wholesalers 19 documents that include in-house attorney notes and memos from outside attorneys addressing the company’s lawsuit against Perrigo.
The appeals court said sham patent cases can be considered fraudulent activity that triggers what is known as the crime-fraud exception, which pierces the attorney-client privilege if a client's communication with an attorney was made with the intention to further a crime.
AbbVie told the justices that the ruling greatly expanded the crime-fraud exception. It said the 3rd Circuit and the Washington, D.C.-based Federal Circuit, which specializes in litigation over intellectual property, are in conflict over what “fraud” triggers the exception.
The 3rd Circuit’s decision will incentivize plaintiffs to file antitrust lawsuits claiming that related patent litigation was a sham, AbbVie told the Supreme Court. Those plaintiffs would be able weaponize the threat that they will get their hands on internal attorney records.
AbbVie and attorneys for the wholesalers did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Wednesday. AbbVie denies wrongdoing. The company, which was spun off by Abbott Laboratories in 2012, has said it had a valid basis to sue Perrigo.
AndroGel’s annual U.S. net sales sometimes topped $1 billion before 2015, when generic versions entered the market.
Litigation over AndroGel has dragged out for years, and included a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit that has since been resolved. The drug wholesalers’ case against AbbVie was filed in 2019.
The case is In re: Abbott Laboratories et al, U.S. Supreme Court, unassigned.
For petitioners: Donald Verrilli of Munger, Tolles & Olson
For respondents: No appearance yet
Read more:
Here’s what AbbVie doesn’t want you to know about its sham AndroGel patent case
Perrigo loses bid to revive antitrust case against AbbVie over AndroGel
U.S. Supreme Court rebuffs AbbVie appeal in patent fight involving AndroGel drug
U.S. court voids $448 million award against AbbVie, but revives FTC claim over AndroGel
Reporting by Mike Scarcella
Mga Kaugnay na Asset
Pinakabagong Balita
Disclaimer: Ang mga kabilang sa XM Group ay nagbibigay lang ng serbisyo sa pagpapatupad at pag-access sa aming Online Trading Facility, kung saan pinapahintulutan nito ang pagtingin at/o paggamit sa nilalaman na makikita sa website o sa pamamagitan nito, at walang layuning palitan o palawigin ito, at hindi din ito papalitan o papalawigin. Ang naturang pag-access at paggamit ay palaging alinsunod sa: (i) Mga Tuntunin at Kundisyon; (ii) Mga Babala sa Risk; at (iii) Kabuuang Disclaimer. Kaya naman ang naturang nilalaman ay ituturing na pangkalahatang impormasyon lamang. Mangyaring isaalang-alang na ang mga nilalaman ng aming Online Trading Facility ay hindi paglikom, o alok, para magsagawa ng anumang transaksyon sa mga pinansyal na market. Ang pag-trade sa alinmang pinansyal na market ay nagtataglay ng mataas na lebel ng risk sa iyong kapital.
Lahat ng materyales na nakalathala sa aming Online Trading Facility ay nakalaan para sa layuning edukasyonal/pang-impormasyon lamang at hindi naglalaman – at hindi dapat ituring bilang naglalaman – ng payo at rekomendasyon na pangpinansyal, tungkol sa buwis sa pag-i-invest, o pang-trade, o tala ng aming presyo sa pag-trade, o alok para sa, o paglikom ng, transaksyon sa alinmang pinansyal na instrument o hindi ginustong pinansyal na promosyon.
Sa anumang nilalaman na galing sa ikatlong partido, pati na ang mga nilalaman na inihanda ng XM, ang mga naturang opinyon, balita, pananaliksik, pag-analisa, presyo, ibang impormasyon o link sa ibang mga site na makikita sa website na ito ay ibibigay tulad ng nandoon, bilang pangkalahatang komentaryo sa market at hindi ito nagtataglay ng payo sa pag-i-invest. Kung ang alinmang nilalaman nito ay itinuring bilang pananaliksik sa pag-i-invest, kailangan mong isaalang-alang at tanggapin na hindi ito inilaan at inihanda alinsunod sa mga legal na pangangailangan na idinisenyo para maisulong ang pagsasarili ng pananaliksik sa pag-i-invest, at dahil dito ituturing ito na komunikasyon sa marketing sa ilalim ng mga kaugnay na batas at regulasyon. Mangyaring siguruhin na nabasa at naintindihan mo ang aming Notipikasyon sa Hindi Independyenteng Pananaliksik sa Pag-i-invest at Babala sa Risk na may kinalaman sa impormasyong nakalagay sa itaas, na maa-access dito.
