Supreme Court Decision on Reverse Payments has Significant Implications for Pharmaceutical Manufacturers

Reed Smith’s Global Regulatory Enforcement Law Blog recently featured a detailed analysis of the Supreme Court’s decision in FTC v. Actavis, where the court ruled five-to-three that reverse payments, also called pay-for-delay settlements, can violate antitrust laws and are subject to antitrust review under the rule-of-reason. As reverse payments are commonly used by branded drug manufacturers to settle patent litigation related to generic drug manufacturers’ market entry, this decision will change the approaches courts, drug company litigants, and lawmakers take to the issue of generic entry into a patented brand drug’s market. To learn more about the implications for both branded and generic drug manufacturers, particularly in their approach to resolving patent litigation, read the full alert.

Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://www.lifescienceslegalupdate.com/admin/trackback/302064
Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.







Remember personal info?