down-arrowleft-arrowright-arrow

Fred Kelly Partner

Fred is a trial lawyer with over 30 years of experience who has successfully litigated a wide range of commercial and product-related disputes for life science companies and those in other industries. In addition to his trial work, Fred advises and defends companies on the False Claims Act, state consumer protection acts, trade secret and non-competition claims, the protection of confidential and proprietary information, and product advertising and promotion matters.

LOCATION

Boston

+1.617.426.6800

One Post Office Square,
Boston, MA, 02109

VIEW IN MAPS
  • Fred has most recently litigated disputes involving “reverse payment” agreements, the False Claims Act, licensing and co-promotion agreements, false advertising under state consumer protection acts and the Lanham Act, and off-label promotion. Fred also represents companies in product safety cases, including “mass tort” matters, and recently served as national counsel for a medical device manufacturer in a large product liability case.
  • Fred has litigated disputes over product pricing, consumer privacy, misappropriation of trade secrets and proprietary information, restrictive covenants, and executive compensation. Fred has appeared as lead counsel in in federal and state courts through out the U.S., and in both domestic and international arbitration proceedings.
  • In addition to his courtroom and counseling roles, Fred is a trusted advisor to many international companies and their in-house counsel, helping them to identify, minimize, and manage risk while efficiently allocating legal resources. Fred has managed large case teams within one law firm, and across several law firms as part of a “virtual” firm.
  • Fred is on the Board of Greater Boston Legal Services (GBLS).
  • Currently defending a major biopharmaceutical company in several “reverse payment” case consolidated in the District of Massachusetts.
  • Currently defending several life sciences companies in False Claims Act cases.
  • Skilstaf, Inc. v. CVS Caremark Corp., et al., 669 F.3d 1005 (9th Cir. 2012) - Represented national grocery and pharmacy chain in a putative class action in the North District of California involving alleged inflation of average wholesale pricing (AWP) for prescription drugs by national pharmacy chains . In January 2010, the case was dismissed with prejudice by the trial court for failure to state a claim. On February 9, 2012, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed the trial court’s dismissal.
  • Obtained two defense verdicts for surgical glove manufacturer in a consolidated, eight week jury trial.
  • Obtained defense verdict in a dispute under licensing agreement for a pharmaceutical product where the inventor was seeking $20,000,000 in damages
  • A fight left unfinished – the D.C. Circuit in Takeda v. Burwell declines to clarify the scope of Hatch-Waxman Paragraph IV certifications. Intellectual Property Litigation Alert, July 26, 2016
  • Groundbreaking False Claims Act decision: Unanimous Supreme Court upholds “implied false certification” theory under certain circumstances. Government Investigations & White Collar Defense Alert, June 17, 2016
  • Home Sweet Home: Federal Circuit Decides Venue Requirements for Patent Cases. Intellectual Property Litigation Law Alert, May 2, 2016
  • When the Future Dictates the Present, Intellectual Property Alert, March 25, 2016
  • PharMerica to seek Supreme Court review of First Circuit’s “next-to-file” False Claims Act ruling, Government Investigations & White Collar Defense Alert, February 9, 2016
  • The Supreme Court will review False Claims Act circuit split regarding what counts as a “false” claim for payment, Government Investigations & White Collar Defense Alert, December 9, 2015
  • Federal Court disagrees with FDA, allows drug manufacturer to proceed with truthful, non-misleading off-label promotion of drug, Government Investigations & White Collar Defense Alert, August 11, 2015
  • California Federal Court Takes First Stab at False Advertising Claims Involving Prescription Drugs After POM Wonderful, Intellectual Property Law Alert, October 21, 2014
  • Supreme Court allows POM suit against Coca-Cola for Lanham Act violations, Intellectual Property Law Alert, June 12, 2014
  • Groundbreaking False Claims Act Decisions: Unanimous Supreme Court Upholds ‘Implied False Certification’ Theory Under Certain Circumstances - Westlaw Journal Government Contract, July 28, 2016
  • Looking at Lanham Act Claims Against Drug Cos. Post-Pom - Law360, October 27, 2014
  • 5 out of 5 AV rating from Martindale Hubbell
  • “Massachusetts Super Lawyer” in Business Litigation based on a peer-review survey by Thomson Reuters (2004, 2007, and 2011)
  • “Top Rated Lawyer in Commercial Litigation”, Fall 2012 Litigation Special Report
  • Best Lawyers since 2016
  • Selected by peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America© 2017 for Biotechnology Law in Boston, M.A.
  • University of Virginia, J.D.
  • Harvard College, A.B.
  • Intellectual Property Enforcement
  • Intellectual Property Procurement and Strategy
  • Massachusetts
  • Rhode Island
  • Harvard Law School Trial Advocacy Program, Instructor
  • Yale Moot Court Program, Judge
  • Defense Research Institute, Member
  • Boston Bar Association, Member

+1.617.426.6800
fkelly@haugpartners.com

RELATED SERVICES

  • Intellectual Property Enforcement
  • Intellectual Property Procurement and Strategy

BAR ADMISSIONS

  • Massachusetts
  • Rhode Island

Haug Partners LLP
One Post Office Square,
Boston, MA, 02109
+1.617.426.6800
haugpartners.com

Fred Kelly

Partner

HIGHLIGHT

Fred is a trial lawyer with over 30 years of experience who has successfully litigated a wide range of commercial and product-related disputes for life science companies and those in other industries. In addition to his trial work, Fred advises and defends companies on the False Claims Act, state consumer protection acts, trade secret and non-competition claims, the protection of confidential and proprietary information, and product advertising and promotion matters.

OVERVIEW

Fred has most recently litigated disputes involving “reverse payment” agreements, the False Claims Act, licensing and co-promotion agreements, false advertising under state consumer protection acts and the Lanham Act, and off-label promotion. Fred also represents companies in product safety cases, including “mass tort” matters, and recently served as national counsel for a medical device manufacturer in a large product liability case.

Fred has litigated disputes over product pricing, consumer privacy, misappropriation of trade secrets and proprietary information, restrictive covenants, and executive compensation. Fred has appeared as lead counsel in in federal and state courts through out the U.S., and in both domestic and international arbitration proceedings.

In addition to his courtroom and counseling roles, Fred is a trusted advisor to many international companies and their in-house counsel, helping them to identify, minimize, and manage risk while efficiently allocating legal resources. Fred has managed large case teams within one law firm, and across several law firms as part of a “virtual” firm.

Fred is on the Board of Greater Boston Legal Services (GBLS).

REPRESENTATIVE CASES

  • Currently defending a major biopharmaceutical company in several “reverse payment” case consolidated in the District of Massachusetts.
  • Currently defending several life sciences companies in False Claims Act cases.
  • Skilstaf, Inc. v. CVS Caremark Corp., et al., 669 F.3d 1005 (9th Cir. 2012) - Represented national grocery and pharmacy chain in a putative class action in the North District of California involving alleged inflation of average wholesale pricing (AWP) for prescription drugs by national pharmacy chains . In January 2010, the case was dismissed with prejudice by the trial court for failure to state a claim. On February 9, 2012, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed the trial court’s dismissal.
  • Obtained two defense verdicts for surgical glove manufacturer in a consolidated, eight week jury trial.
  • Obtained defense verdict in a dispute under licensing agreement for a pharmaceutical product where the inventor was seeking $20,000,000 in damages

PUBLICATIONS

  • A fight left unfinished – the D.C. Circuit in Takeda v. Burwell declines to clarify the scope of Hatch-Waxman Paragraph IV certifications. Intellectual Property Litigation Alert, July 26, 2016
  • Groundbreaking False Claims Act decision: Unanimous Supreme Court upholds “implied false certification” theory under certain circumstances. Government Investigations & White Collar Defense Alert, June 17, 2016
  • Home Sweet Home: Federal Circuit Decides Venue Requirements for Patent Cases. Intellectual Property Litigation Law Alert, May 2, 2016
  • When the Future Dictates the Present, Intellectual Property Alert, March 25, 2016
  • PharMerica to seek Supreme Court review of First Circuit’s “next-to-file” False Claims Act ruling, Government Investigations & White Collar Defense Alert, February 9, 2016
  • The Supreme Court will review False Claims Act circuit split regarding what counts as a “false” claim for payment, Government Investigations & White Collar Defense Alert, December 9, 2015
  • Federal Court disagrees with FDA, allows drug manufacturer to proceed with truthful, non-misleading off-label promotion of drug, Government Investigations & White Collar Defense Alert, August 11, 2015
  • California Federal Court Takes First Stab at False Advertising Claims Involving Prescription Drugs After POM Wonderful, Intellectual Property Law Alert, October 21, 2014
  • Supreme Court allows POM suit against Coca-Cola for Lanham Act violations, Intellectual Property Law Alert, June 12, 2014
  • Groundbreaking False Claims Act Decisions: Unanimous Supreme Court Upholds ‘Implied False Certification’ Theory Under Certain Circumstances - Westlaw Journal Government Contract, July 28, 2016
  • Looking at Lanham Act Claims Against Drug Cos. Post-Pom - Law360, October 27, 2014

AWARDS

  • 5 out of 5 AV rating from Martindale Hubbell
  • “Massachusetts Super Lawyer” in Business Litigation based on a peer-review survey by Thomson Reuters (2004, 2007, and 2011)
  • “Top Rated Lawyer in Commercial Litigation”, Fall 2012 Litigation Special Report
  • Best Lawyers since 2016
  • Selected by peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America© 2017 for Biotechnology Law in Boston, M.A.

EDUCATION

  • University of Virginia, J.D.
  • Harvard College, A.B.

BAR ADMISSIONS

  • Massachusetts
  • Rhode Island

MEMBERSHIPS

  • Harvard Law School Trial Advocacy Program, Instructor
  • Yale Moot Court Program, Judge
  • Defense Research Institute, Member
  • Boston Bar Association, Member