DOCSLIB.ORG

United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Case: 18-2621 Document: 003113256881 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/05/2019 Nos. 18-2621, -2748, -2758 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. ABBVIE INC.; ABBOTT LABORATORIES; UNIMED PHARMACEUTICALS LLC; BESINS HEALTHCARE, INC.; *TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC., Defendants/Cross-Appellants. (*Dismissed Pursuant To Court’s 3/12/2019 Order) On Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, No. 2:14-cv-05151, Hon. Harvey Bartle III OPENING/RESPONSE BRIEF FOR APPELLEES/CROSS-APPELLANTS ABBVIE INC., ABBOTT LABORATORIES, AND UNIMED PHARMACEUTICALS LLC JEFFREY I. WEINBERGER SETH P. WAXMAN STUART N. SENATOR LEON B. GREENFIELD ADAM R. LAWTON CATHERINE M.A. CARROLL MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP BRITTANY BLUEITT AMADI 350 South Grand Avenue WILMER CUTLER PICKERING Los Angeles, CA 90071 HALE AND DORR LLP (213) 683-9100 1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20006 ELAINE J. GOLDENBERG (202) 663-6000 MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP 1155 F Street NW WILLIAM F. LEE Washington, DC 20004 WILMER CUTLER PICKERING (202) 220-1000 HALE AND DORR LLP 60 State Street Boston, MA 02109 June 5, 2019 (617) 526-6000 ADDITIONAL COUNSEL LISTED ON INSIDE COVER Case: 18-2621 Document: 003113256881 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/05/2019 PAUL H. SAINT-ANTOINE JOHN S. YI DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP One Logan Square, Suite 2000 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 988-2700 Case: 18-2621 Document: 003113256881 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/05/2019 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT AbbVie Inc. has no parent corporation, and no publicly held company owns 10% or more of its stock. Abbott Laboratories has no parent corporation, and no publicly held company owns 10% or more of its stock. Unimed Pharmaceuticals LLC is an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of AbbVie Inc., a publicly traded company. i Case: 18-2621 Document: 003113256881 Page: 4 Date Filed: 06/05/2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT .......................................................... i TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .................................................................................... vi INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1 JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT .......................................................................... 4 STATEMENT OF ISSUES ....................................................................................... 4 STATEMENT OF RELATED CASES ..................................................................... 6 STATEMENT OF THE CASE .................................................................................. 6 A. AndroGel And The Testosterone Replacement Therapy Market.................................................................................................... 6 B. The Patent-Infringement Suits .............................................................. 9 1. The ’894 patent ........................................................................... 9 2. The Hatch-Waxman Act ........................................................... 11 3. Teva’s and Perrigo’s products and the ensuing lawsuits ...................................................................................... 13 a. Teva ................................................................................ 13 b. Perrigo ............................................................................. 19 C. The FTC’s Complaint And Proceedings Below ................................. 22 1. Dismissal of Count 2 ................................................................. 23 2. Summary judgment on objective baselessness ......................... 25 3. Trial ........................................................................................... 28 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ............................................................................... 31 ii Case: 18-2621 Document: 003113256881 Page: 5 Date Filed: 06/05/2019 ARGUMENT ........................................................................................................... 34 ABBVIE AND BESINS APPEAL .......................................................................... 34 I. THE INFRINGEMENT SUITS WERE NOT OBJECTIVELY BASELESS .................... 34 A. Standard Of Review ............................................................................ 36 B. The Teva Suit Was Not A Sham ......................................................... 37 C. The Perrigo Suit Was Not A Sham ..................................................... 46 D. The Settlement Agreements Flatly Refute The District Court’s Conclusion .............................................................................. 50 II. THE INFRINGEMENT SUITS WERE NOT SUBJECTIVELY BASELESS ................... 53 A. Standard Of Review ............................................................................ 55 B. The District Court Improperly Collapsed The Objective And Subjective Elements And Identified No Evidence Of Subjective Baselessness ...................................................................... 55 C. The District Court Disregarded Substantial Evidence That AbbVie And Besins Sued To Procure A Favorable Outcome .............................................................................................. 58 III. THE FTC FAILED TO PROVE MONOPOLY POWER ........................................... 61 A. Standard Of Review ............................................................................ 62 B. The District Court Clearly Erred By Excluding Injectables From The Relevant Market ............................................... 63 C. The District Court Committed Legal Error In Finding Monopoly Power Within The Defined Market ................................... 66 1. The court erred in giving dispositive weight to market share data while ignoring real-world evidence .................................................................................... 66 iii Case: 18-2621 Document: 003113256881 Page: 6 Date Filed: 06/05/2019 2. The district court erred in finding high barriers to entry ........................................................................................... 70 IV. THE DISGORGEMENT AWARD IS UNLAWFUL .................................................. 72 A. Standard Of Review ............................................................................ 72 B. The Court Had No Authority To Order Disgorgement ....................... 73 1. Section 13(b) does not authorize disgorgement ........................ 74 2. The disgorgement order is a penalty, not an equitable remedy ....................................................................... 77 3. The FTC’s failure to prove the preconditions for injunctive relief also forecloses disgorgement.......................... 80 C. The District Court Abused Its Discretion In Awarding Disgorgement ...................................................................................... 81 1. The court misconstrued the record regarding the FDA’s knowledge of Perrigo’s license date ............................. 82 2. The court unreasonably assumed that Perrigo would have sued the FDA for undue delay before any delay occurred .................................................................... 83 RESPONSE TO FTC APPEAL ............................................................................... 85 V. THE COURT CORRECTLY DISMISSED THE “REVERSE PAYMENT” CLAIM ............................................................................................................. 86 A. Standard Of Review ............................................................................ 86 B. The FTC Failed To State A Reverse-Payment Claim ......................... 86 C. Remand On The Reverse-Payment Claim Would Be Futile .................................................................................................... 91 VI. THE FTC’S CHALLENGES TO THE REMEDIAL ORDERS FAIL ........................... 93 A. Standard Of Review ............................................................................ 93 iv Case: 18-2621 Document: 003113256881 Page: 7 Date Filed: 06/05/2019 B. The FTC’s Challenge To The Disgorgement Award Fails Because Teva Would Not Have Entered The Market Regardless Of The Infringement Suit ................................................. 93 C. The Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion In Denying Injunctive Relief ................................................................................ 102 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................... 106 CERTIFICATE OF BAR MEMBERSHIP (LAR 46.1) CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE v Case: 18-2621 Document: 003113256881 Page: 8 Date Filed: 06/05/2019 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES Page(s) A&H Sportswear, Inc. v. Victoria’s Secret Stores, Inc., 237 F.3d 198 (3d Cir. 2000) .......................................................................... 93 Abbott Laboratories v. Sandoz, Inc., 544 F.3d 1341 (Fed. Cir. 2008) .................... 11 Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275 (2001) ..................................................... 76, 77 Allen-Myland, Inc. v. IBM Corp., 33 F.3d 194 (3d Cir. 1994) ................................ 62 Armstrong Surgical Center, Inc. v. Armstrong County Memorial Hospital, 185 F.3d 154 (3d Cir. 1999) .................................................... 53, 56 Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) .................................................................... 86 Barr Laboratories, Inc. v. Abbott
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Honorable James Knoll Gardner James Knoll Gardner
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COURT PORTRAIT UNVEILING AND MEMORIAL SERVICE OF The Honorable THE HONORABLE JAMES KNOLL GARDNER JAMES KNOLL GARDNER FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHTEEN THREE O’CLOCK IN THE AFTERNOON COURTROOM 4B, 4TH FLOOR EDWARD N. CAHN COURTHOUSE & FEDERAL BUILDING 504 W. HAMILTON STREET ALLENTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA 18101 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JUDGES OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CHIEF JUDGE Honorable Lawrence F. Stengel JUDGES Honorable Petrese B. Tucker Honorable Nitza I. Quiñones Alejandro Honorable Cynthia M. Rufe Honorable Jeffrey L. Schmehl Honorable Timothy J. Savage Honorable Gerald A. McHugh Honorable Gene E.K. Pratter Honorable Edward G. Smith Honorable Paul S. Diamond Honorable Wendy Beetlestone Honorable Juan R. Sánchez Honorable Mark A. Kearney Honorable Joel H. Slomsky Honorable Gerald J. Pappert Honorable C. Darnell Jones II Honorable Joseph F. Leeson, Jr. Honorable Mitchell S. Goldberg SENIOR JUDGES Honorable J. William Ditter, Jr. Honorable Eduardo C. Robreno Honorable Robert F. Kelly Honorable Anita B. Brody Honorable Jan E. DuBois Honorable Berle M. Schiller Honorable Harvey Bartle III Honorable R. Barclay Surrick Honorable John R. Padova Honorable Michael M. Baylson Honorable J. Curtis Joyner CLERK OF COURT Kate Barkman HONORABLE HONORABLE JAMES KNOLL GARDNER JAMES KNOLL GARDNER James Knoll Gardner served with distinction as a judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for SEPTEMBER 14, 1940 - APRIL 26, 2017 more than 15 years. He was nominated by President George W. Bush and confirmed by the Senate October 2, 2002.
    [Show full text]
  • Members by Circuit (As of January 3, 2017)
    Federal Judges Association - Members by Circuit (as of January 3, 2017) 1st Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Bruce M. Selya Jeffrey R. Howard Kermit Victor Lipez Ojetta Rogeriee Thompson Sandra L. Lynch United States District Court District of Maine D. Brock Hornby George Z. Singal John A. Woodcock, Jr. Jon David LeVy Nancy Torresen United States District Court District of Massachusetts Allison Dale Burroughs Denise Jefferson Casper Douglas P. Woodlock F. Dennis Saylor George A. O'Toole, Jr. Indira Talwani Leo T. Sorokin Mark G. Mastroianni Mark L. Wolf Michael A. Ponsor Patti B. Saris Richard G. Stearns Timothy S. Hillman William G. Young United States District Court District of New Hampshire Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr. Joseph N. LaPlante Landya B. McCafferty Paul J. Barbadoro SteVen J. McAuliffe United States District Court District of Puerto Rico Daniel R. Dominguez Francisco Augusto Besosa Gustavo A. Gelpi, Jr. Jay A. Garcia-Gregory Juan M. Perez-Gimenez Pedro A. Delgado Hernandez United States District Court District of Rhode Island Ernest C. Torres John J. McConnell, Jr. Mary M. Lisi William E. Smith 2nd Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Barrington D. Parker, Jr. Christopher F. Droney Dennis Jacobs Denny Chin Gerard E. Lynch Guido Calabresi John Walker, Jr. Jon O. Newman Jose A. Cabranes Peter W. Hall Pierre N. LeVal Raymond J. Lohier, Jr. Reena Raggi Robert A. Katzmann Robert D. Sack United States District Court District of Connecticut Alan H. NeVas, Sr. Alfred V. Covello Alvin W. Thompson Dominic J. Squatrito Ellen B.
    [Show full text]
  • 1A APPENDIX a PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES
    1a APPENDIX A PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT __________ Nos. 16-4397, 16-4410, 16-4411, 16-4427, 17-1346 __________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Appellant in 17-1346 v. CHAKA FATTAH, SR., Appellant in 16-4397 KAREN NICHOLAS, Appellant in 16-4410 ROBERT BRAND, Appellant in 16-4411 HERBERT VEDERMAN, Appellant in 16-4427 __________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania District Court Nos. 2-15-cr-00346-001, 2a 2-15-cr-00346-002, 2-15-cr-00346-003, 2-15-cr-00346-004 District Judge: The Honorable Harvey Bartle III Argued January 18, 2018 Before: SMITH, Chief Judge, GREENAWAY, JR., and KRAUSE, Circuit Judges (Filed: August 9, 2018) Andrea G. Foulkes Eric L. Gibson Paul L. Gray Robert A. Zauzmer Office of United States Attorney 615 Chestnut Street Suite 1250 Philadelphia, PA 19106 Jonathan Ian Kravis [ARGUED] United States Department of Justice Criminal Division, Public Integrity Section 1400 New York Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20005 Counsel for the United States Mark M. Lee Bruce P. Merenstein [ARGUED] Samuel W. Silver Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis 1600 Market Street Suite 3600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Counsel for Appellant Fattah 3a Ann C. Flannery [ARGUED] Suite 2700 1835 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 Lisa A. Mathewson Suite 810 123 South Broad Street Philadelphia, PA 19109 Counsel for Appellant Nicholas Alan Silber Pashman Stein Walder Hayden 21 Main Street Suite 200 Hackensack, NJ 07601 Counsel for National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Amicus Appellant Nicholas Mira E. Baylson Barry Gross [ARGUED] Meredith C.
    [Show full text]
  • In the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
    Case 4:16-cv-00469-MWB Document 51 Filed 06/22/17 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA : RANDY WALTZ, et al. : : 4:16-cv-00469-MWB v. : : AVEDA TRANSPORTATION AND : ENERGY SERVICES INC., et al. : : PLAINTIFFS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE FLSA SETTLEMENT Having settled this FLSA collective action lawsuit, Originating Plaintiff Randy Waltz and Opt-In Plaintiffs David Canada, Toby Hayes, Mark Ortiz, Gary Solinger, John Tinkle, and Michael Tinkle (collectively “Plaintiffs”) now move for judicial approval of the settlements. See Schwartz v. The Pennsylvania State University, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58874 (M.D. Pa. Apr. 18, 2017) (Brann, J.) (discussing legal standards applicable to approval of FLSA settlements). Defendants do not oppose this motion. The settlement agreements are attached as Exhibit A, and a declaration addressing the undersigned’s fee lodestar (which is greater than the fee recovered under the settlement) and out-of-pocket expenses is attached as Exhibit B. In the next few days, the undersigned counsel will file a brief in support of this motion pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7.5. 1 Case 4:16-cv-00469-MWB Document 51 Filed 06/22/17 Page 2 of 2 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court grant this motion and approve the settlement of this FLSA action. A proposed order is attached. Date: June 22, 2017 Respectfully, /s/ Peter Winebrake Peter Winebrake R. Andrew Santillo Mark J. Gottesfeld WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC 715 Twining Road, Suite 211 Dresher, PA 19025
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Judges Association Current Members by Circuit As of 10/8/2020
    Federal Judges Association Current Members by Circuit as of 10/8/2020 1st Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Jeffrey R. Howard 0 Kermit Victor Lipez (Snr) Sandra L. Lynch Ojetta Rogeriee Thompson United States District Court District of Maine D. Brock Hornby (Snr) 0 Jon David Levy George Z. Singal (Snr) Nancy Torresen John A. Woodcock, Jr. (Snr) United States District Court District of Massachusetts Allison Dale Burroughs 0 Denise Jefferson Casper Timothy S. Hillman Mark G. Mastroianni George A. O'Toole, Jr. (Snr) Michael A. Ponsor (Snr) Patti B. Saris F. Dennis Saylor Leo T. Sorokin Richard G. Stearns Indira Talwani Mark L. Wolf (Snr) Douglas P. Woodlock (Snr) William G. Young United States District Court District of New Hampshire Paul J. Barbadoro 0 Joseph N. Laplante Steven J. McAuliffe (Snr) Landya B. McCafferty Federal Judges Association Current Members by Circuit as of 10/8/2020 United States District Court District of Puerto Rico Francisco Augusto Besosa 0 Pedro A. Delgado Hernandez Daniel R. Dominguez (Snr) Jay A. Garcia-Gregory (Snr) Gustavo A. Gelpi, Jr. Juan M. Perez-Gimenez (Snr) United States District Court District of Rhode Island Mary M. Lisi (Snr) 0 John J. McConnell, Jr. William E. Smith 2nd Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Jose A. Cabranes 0 Guido Calabresi (Snr) Denny Chin Christopher F. Droney (Ret) Peter W. Hall Pierre N. Leval (Snr) Raymond J. Lohier, Jr. Gerard E. Lynch (Snr) Jon O. Newman (Snr) Barrington D. Parker, Jr. (Snr) Reena Raggi (Snr) Robert D. Sack (Snr) John M.
    [Show full text]
  • Norma L. Shapiro
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COURT IN MEMORY OF THE HONORABLE NORMA L. SHAPIRO TH U R S DAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND SEVENTEEN THREE O’CLOCK IN THE AFTERNOON CEREMONIAL COURTROOM UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 601 MARKET STREET PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW JUSTICE THE GUARDIAN OF LIBERTY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JUDGES OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CHIEF JUDGE Honorable Petrese B. Tucker SENIOR JUDGES Honorable J. William Ditter, Jr. Honorable J. Curtis Joyner Honorable Thomas N. O’Neill, Jr. Honorable Eduardo C. Robreno Honorable Robert F. Kelly Honorable Anita B. Brody Honorable Jan E. DuBois Honorable Berle M. Schiller Honorable Harvey Bartle III Honorable R. Barclay Surrick Honorable John R. Padova Honorable Michael M. Baylson JUDGES Honorable Legrome D. Davis Honorable Mitchell S. Goldberg Honorable Cynthia M. Rufe Honorable Honorable Timothy J. Savage Honorable Jeffrey L. Schmehl Nitza I. Quiñones Alejandro Honorable Gene E.K. Pratter Honorable Gerald A. McHugh Honorable Lawrence F. Stengel Honorable Edward G. Smith Honorable Paul S. Diamond Honorable Wendy Beetlestone H Honorable Mark A. Kearney Honorable Joel H. Slomsky Honorable Gerald J. Pappert onorable Juan R. Sánchez Honorable C. Darnell Jones II Honorable Joseph F. Leeson, Jr. CLERK OF COURT Kate Barkman THE HONORABLE NORMA L. SHAPIRO JULY 27, 1928 – JULY 22, 2016 TERM OF SERVICE AS A UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: SEPTEMBER 29, 1978 - JULY 22, 2016 THE HONORABLE NORMA L. SHAPIRO firsts. The only woman in her class, Judge Shapiro earned her law degree at the University Judge Norma Shapiro was an exceptional jurist with a career that included many of Pennsylvania Law School, magna cum laude, Order of the Coif, and was an editor of the Law Review.
    [Show full text]
  • The Honorable Edmund V. Ludwig
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA SPECIAL SESSION OF THE CO U RT FOR A MEMORIAL SERVICE AND THE PRESENTATION OF THE PO RT R A I T OF THE HONORABLE EDMUND V. LUDWIG FRIDAY, THE TWENTY-EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND SEVENTEEN THREE O’CLOCK IN THE AFTERNOON COURTROOM 12-A UNITED STATES DISTRICT CO U RT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 601 MARKET STREET PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW JUSTICE THE GUARDIAN OF LIBERTY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JUDGES OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CHIEF JUDGE Honorable Petrese B. Tucker SENIOR JUDGES Honorable J. William Ditter, Jr. Honorable Eduardo C. Robreno Honorable Thomas N. O’Neill, Jr. Honorable Anita B. Brody Honorable Robert F. Kelly Honorable Berle M. Schiller Honorable Jan E. DuBois Honorable R. Barclay Surrick Honorable Harvey Bartle III Honorable Michael M. Baylson Honorable John R. Padova Honorable James Knoll Gardner Honorable J. Curtis Joyner JUDGES Honorable Legrome D. Davis Honorable Mitchell S. Goldberg Honorable Cynthia M. Rufe Honorable Honorable Timothy J. Savage Honorable Jeffrey L. Schmehl Nitza I. Quiñones Alejandro Honorable Gene E.K. Pratter Honorable Gerald A. McHugh Honorable Lawrence F. Stengel Honorable Edward G. Smith Honorable Paul S. Diamond Honorable Wendy Beetlestone H Honorable Mark A. Kearney Honorable Joel H. Slomsky Honorable Gerald J. Pappert onorable Juan R. Sánchez Honorable C. Darnell Jones II Honorable Joseph F. Leeson, Jr. CLERK OF COURT Kate Barkman THE HONORABLE EDMUND V. LUDWIG MAY 20, 1928 – MAY 17, 2016 Photo by Barbara H.
    [Show full text]
  • Precedential United States Court of Appeals for The
    Case: 07-3081 Document: 00318782393 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/07/2009 PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 07-3081 KIMBERLIE D. WEBB, Appellant v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania D.C. Civil Action No. 05-cv-5238 (Honorable Harvey Bartle III) Argued September 9, 2008 Before: SCIRICA, Chief Judge, McKEE and SMITH, Circuit Judges. (Filed: April 7, 2009) Case: 07-3081 Document: 00318782393 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/07/2009 JEFFREY M. POLLOCK, ESQUIRE (ARGUED) ABBEY T. HARRIS, ESQUIRE Fox Rothschild LLP Princeton Pike Corporate Center, Building 3 997 Lenox Drive Lawrenceville, New Jersey 08648 SEVAL YILDIRIM, ESQUIRE Whittier Law School 3333 Harbor Boulevard Costa Mesa, California 92626 Attorneys for Appellant ELEANOR N. EWING, ESQUIRE (ARGUED) City of Philadelphia Law Department One Parkway 1515 Arch Street, 17th Floor Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19102 Attorney for Appellee JOHN S. GHOSE, ESQUIRE FRED T. MAGAZINER, ESQUIRE Dechert LLP Cira Centre , 18th Floor 2929 Arch Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104 Attorneys for Amici Curiae/Appellant, American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, 2 Case: 07-3081 Document: 00318782393 Page: 3 Date Filed: 04/07/2009 American Civil Liberties Union, Council on American Islamic Relations, Majlis Ash'Shura, American Muslim Law Enforcement Officers Association, Islamic Society of North America, Muslim Public Affairs Council, Muslim Alliance in North America, Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation, The Sikh Coalition, and Shalom Center OPINION OF THE COURT SCIRICA, Chief Judge. In this employment discrimination case, the issue on appeal is whether a police officer’s request to wear religious garb with her uniform could be reasonably accommodated without imposing an undue burden upon the City of Philadelphia.
    [Show full text]
  • Andrea M. Kirshenbaum Principal Chair, Employment and Labor Practice Group
    Andrea M. Kirshenbaum Principal Chair, Employment and Labor Practice Group Philadelphia, PA Phone: 215-587-1126 Fax: 215-320-4711 [email protected] Defends employers nationally in federal and state court litigation involving all major employment statutes, represents them in related government investigations, and counsels them proactively on compliance with these statutes. Bio Practices Employment and Labor Andrea M. Kirshenbaum is the Chair of the Firm's Employment and Labor Wage and Hour Practice Group and its related Practice Groups, Employment and Collective Employment and Employee Class Actions, Employment & Employee Relations, Labor, Trade Secret & Relations Non Compete Law, and Wage and Hour. She is also a member of the Firm's Employment Collective and Class Actions Appellate Department. She defends employers nationally in federal and Trade Secret & Non-Compete Law state court litigation involving all major employment statutes, represents Labor them in related government investigations, and counsels them proactively Health Care on compliance with these statutes. Health Care Litigation Services Ms. Kirshenbaum focuses a signi{cant portion of her practice on wage and Higher Education hour-related compliance and litigation under the Fair Labor Standards Act Hospitality and Retail (FLSA) and applicable state laws governing wages and pay practices. She Regulated Cannabis also defends clients in complex class action litigation involving a variety of Appellate federal and state statutes as well as claims under the common law. Class Action Defense Ms. Kirshenbaum has broad industry experience, with clients in the Commercial Litigation construction, commercial real estate, energy and utilities, {nancial services, Coronavirus (COVID-19) Task health care, hospitality and retail, information technology, manufacturing, Force pharmaceutical, and professional services industries, among others.
    [Show full text]
  • BRIEF for APPELLANTS and VOLUME ONE of the JOINT APPENDIX (Pages 1A–11A) ______
    Case: 14-1229 Document: 003111590002 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/15/2014 In the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit No. 14–1229 ______________________________________________________ A.S., a minor by SALLEE MILLER, Guardian, and SALLEE MILLER, Individually, Appellants, v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORP., d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline. ______________________________________________________ On appeal from the order dated July 26, 2013 of U.S. District Judge Mary A. McLaughlin, certified for interlocutory appeal by permission on December 12, 2013 by Chief U.S. District Judge Christopher C. Conner in Civil Action No. 13–cv–2382 pending in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania ______________________________________________________ BRIEF FOR APPELLANTS AND VOLUME ONE OF THE JOINT APPENDIX (Pages 1a–11a) ______________________________________________________ Howard J. Bashman Adam Peavy 2300 Computer Avenue BAILEY PEAVY BAILEY PLLC Suite G–22 440 Louisiana Street, Suite 2100 Willow Grove, PA 19090 Houston, TX 77002 (215) 830–1458 (713) 425–7100 Counsel for plaintiffs/appellants Case: 14-1229 Document: 003111590002 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/15/2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1 II. STATEMENT OF SUBJECT–MATTER AND APPELLATE JURISDICTION ............................................................................................. 5 III. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE ON APPEAL ............................................ 7 IV. STATEMENT
    [Show full text]
  • JUDGE HARVEY BARTLE III Judge Bartle Was Born on June 6, 1941 In
    JUDGE HARVEY BARTLE III Judge Bartle was born on June 6, 1941 in Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania. He was graduated cum laude from Princeton University with an A.B. in 1962 and received his LL.B. cum laude from the University of Pennsylvania Law School in 1965. Judge Bartle was admitted to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 1965. From 1965 to 1967 he served as a law clerk to The Honorable John Morgan Davis of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. After engaging in private practice with the law firm of Dechert Price & Rhoads in Philadelphia from 1967 to 1979, he served as the Pennsylvania Insurance Commissioner from 1979 to 1980. He was the Pennsylvania Attorney General from 1980 to 1981. He then returned to private practice at Dechert Price & Rhoads. Judge Bartle was appointed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on September 16, 1991. PRELIMINARY GENERAL MATTERS 1. Correspondence with the Court. Counsel may write to Judge Bartle to request an extension of time and for all matters pertaining to scheduling. Judge Bartle does not permit correspondence in lieu of formal discovery or contested motions or other substantive matters which should be made of record. 2. Communications with Law Clerks. Judge Bartle has no objection if law clerks are used as vehicles for relaying information to the Court. He does not permit law clerks to give advice to counsel. 3. Telephone Conferences. Judge Bartle will use telephone conferences for scheduling changes, extensions of time, and similar matters. He often has conference calls on discovery motions.
    [Show full text]
  • USA V. Barlow
    Opinions of the United 2008 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2-25-2008 USA v. Barlow Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2008 Recommended Citation "USA v. Barlow" (2008). 2008 Decisions. 1537. https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2008/1537 This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2008 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT Case No: 05-3324 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. COREY BARLOW, Appellant On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Crim. No. 03-CR-00731 District Judge: The Honorable Harvey Bartle, III Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) February 15, 2008 Before: SLOVITER, and SMITH, Circuit Judges, DIAMOND, District Judge* Filed: February 25, 2008 *The Honorable Gustave Diamond, Senior District Judge for the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation. 1 OPINION DIAMOND, District Judge. Appellant Corey Barlow appeals from the District Court’s judgment sentencing him to 180 months of imprisonment on his guilty plea to drug trafficking and firearms charges. He argues on appeal that the waiver of his right to appeal contained in the written plea bargain agreement which he signed should not be enforced because he was denied effective assistance of counsel during the plea process, and, therefore, the waiver of his appellate rights was not knowing and voluntary.
    [Show full text]