RP Healthcare, Inc., et al. v. Ranbaxy Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.

Should this Court permit the Third Circuit’s “proper basis” exception to the “time-of-filing” rule to substantially extend this Court’s decision in Caterpillar, Inc., v. Lewis, 519 U.S. 61 (1996)?

Do Caterpillar’s “considerations of finality, efficiency, and economy….” override removal defects when a judgment of dismissal is entered at an early, preliminary stage of the litigation rather than after trial?

May a party assert a new jurisdictional basis for removal that was not raised until more than one year after removal?

Is the legality of an agreement between a brand name drug company and a generic drug company to divide markets and stabilize prices, after the controlling patent of the brand name company expires, to be subject to this Court’s decision in F.T.C. v. Actavis, 570 U.S. ___, 2013 WL 2922122 (2013), and therefore, a rule of reason analysis, as the district court and the Third Circuit held; or rather, is such an agreement subject to this Court’s decision in Palmer v. BRG of GA, 498 U.S. 46 (1990), holding such agreements to be per se illegal?

Does the admitted agreement and the admission by the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of the Defendant state a plausible claim under the antitrust laws of the State of California?