The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit expressed skepticism this week toward Acorda Therapeutics Inc.’s efforts to significantly increase a royalty award in its favor. The company had originally received a $16.5 million award in an arbitration dispute over its multiple sclerosis drug, Ampyra, but is seeking an additional $66 million. During oral arguments, a judge on the panel pointedly noted that Acorda may have complicated its position by opting for arbitration initially.
According to the details provided in recent coverage, the case centers around a dispute regarding royalties related to technology used in the production of Ampyra. Acorda claims that the arbitration panel failed to account for critical elements when determining the initial award. However, the judges appeared unconvinced by these arguments, highlighting the constraints that come with challenging arbitration outcomes at the appellate level.
The complexity of intellectual property disputes like this one often leads companies to seek arbitration as a quicker alternative to litigation. However, as evidenced by the tone of the Second Circuit’s response, overturning or augmenting arbitration outcomes remains a challenging endeavor. In another report covering the proceedings, it was noted that Judge Denny Chin articulated the difficulty of Acorda’s position succinctly by suggesting that it may find itself “kind of in the soup” due to its arbitration choice. This phrase underscores the inherent risk companies face when attempting to alter arbitration awards under the appellate system.
For more information on the legal intricacies involved, the full account is available through Law360, which documented the proceedings and provides ongoing coverage of high-stakes intellectual property legal battles.