The US FTC files an amicus brief in the Court of Appeals explaining that commitment not to compete raises the same antitrust concerns as the reverse-payment patent settlements (King Drug / SmithKlineBeecham)

U.S. FTC files an amicus brief in the Court of Appeal urging to reverse the District Court finding in the Lamictal Direct Purchase Antitrust Litigation* On 28 April, 2014 the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) filed an amicus brief in the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in the Lamictal Direct Purchase Antitrust Litigation urging the court to reverse the District Court finding in this case. In the Lamictal Direct Purchase Antitrust Litigation the plaintiffs allege that Teva

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

  • DLA Piper Weiss-Tessbach (Vienna)

Quotation

Nicole Daniel, The US FTC files an amicus brief in the Court of Appeals explaining that commitment not to compete raises the same antitrust concerns as the reverse-payment patent settlements (King Drug / SmithKlineBeecham), 28 April 2014, e-Competitions Bulletin April 2014, Art. N° 66851

Visites 135

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues