As we mentioned yesterday, due to Dechert’s involvement in litigation concerning the drug at issue in Pliva, Inc. v. Mensing, No. 09–993, slip op. (U.S. June 23, 2011), we can’t comment on the case.
But some other people have.  Here’s a wrap up of what other legal types (not the press) have said.

The FDA Law Blog channels Harry Carey, “Holy Cow!” Generics win.

The Wall Street Journal’s Law Blog called it a “red letter day” for generic manufacturers.  The Journal’s Health Blog mentioned the case, but didn’t have all that much to say.

That was all the commentary we picked up from DDLaw’s blog roll.

Looking farther afield, we found a couple of paragraphs on the Forbes Blog. We then tried checking out other defense firms.

What we found were slim pickings.

Duane Morris had a long but pretty much “just the facts” analysis.

Faegre gave us three paragraphs.

That’s it. That was all we found, at least as of this morning.

From the other side, ATLA goes nuts.

By far the most substantive post we found was from the Law Profs, although (unfortunately but predictably) they support the side of unlimited litigation (law students need jobs).  With their nose for the arcane, the Profs focused on the court’s “non obstante” discussion – the one non-majority (it was 4-4) section of the Mensing opinion.