Chad A. Landmon

Axinn Veltrop & Harkrider (Hartford)
Lawyer (Partner)

Chad Landmon is co-chair of Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP’s intellectual property practice and chair of the firm’s FDA Practice Group. Mr. Landmon focuses his practice on patent litigation and counseling and food and drug law, with an emphasis on pharmaceuticals, biologics and human tissue products. He maintains a particular focus on Paragraph IV patent litigation, having litigated dozens of cases for numerous pharmaceutical companies involving a wide variety of products, including on many blockbuster products. By coupling his patent litigation experience with his FDA expertise, Chad enables pharmaceutical clients to develop and execute on patent and FDA strategies to bring products to market in the most efficient and profitable manner.

Linked authors

Axinn Veltrop & Harkrider (New York)
Axinn Veltrop & Harkrider (New York)

Articles

257 Bulletin

Chad A. Landmon A US Court of Appeals holds that the reverse payment settlement between branded and generic pharma companies did not violate the antitrust laws because the exclusionary effect of the agreement did not exceed the scope of the patent (Tamoxifen Citrate)

95

Over the past decade, practitioners, policy makers and commentators have increasingly debated the issues involved when the antitrust laws intersect with patent rights. Both the antitrust and patent laws are designed to promote competition and, as a result, societal wellbeing. However, the (...)

Chad A. Landmon A US Court of Appeals holds that the reverse payment settlement between branded and generic pharma companies did not violate the antitrust laws because the exclusionary effect of the agreement did not exceed the scope of the patent (Schering-Plough)

102

Over the past decade, practitioners, policy makers and commentators have increasingly debated the issues involved when the antitrust laws intersect with patent rights. Both the antitrust and patent laws are designed to promote competition and, as a result, societal wellbeing. However, the (...)

Chad A. Landmon, Donald W. Hawthorne, John D. Harkrider The U.S. FTC votes to file a complaint in federal court after discovering a merged firm’s failure to provide complete clearance paperwork in an HSR filing and subsequent price increases after a merger in the market for pharmaceutical databases (Hearst/Medi-Span)

60

On April 4, 2001, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) took the unusual step of voting to file a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia against The Hearst Trust, its subsidiary The Hearst Corporation, and First DataBank, a wholly owned subsidiary of The (...)

Send a message