This suit by one drug company against its competitor for the latter’s attempts to derail FDA approval of the plaintiff’s drug gave rise to an Anti-SLAPP motion.  The decision holds that the defendant’s citizen’s petition with the FDA seeking to prevent FDA approval of plaintiff’s drug was protected activity under CCP 425.16(e) and that the Noerr-Pennington doctrine shielded defendant from liability for filing that petition, plaintiff not having shown that it fell within the Noerr-Pennington doctrine’s sham litigation exception.  However, defendant’s statements to its actual and potential investors fell within the CCP 426.17(c) exception for statements by a seller about its or a competitor’s products.  Since neither party yet had approval to sell its products, the targeted audience of investors was the audience that counted for purposes of the exception.  Finally, the decision holds that plaintiff failed to introduce any evidence sufficient to support the lack of probable cause element of its malicious prosecution claim based on defendant’s petitions for inter partes review of plaintiff’s patents.  Two of the three petitions were rejected by PTAB but not on grounds that established they were completely lacking in arguable merit.  And the third petition was ultimately granted.