The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit concludes that a reverse payment need not be in cash (Loestrin)

First Circuit boosts antitrust challenges to pay-for-delay settlements by finding non-cash deals subject to Actavis scrutiny* Antitrust challenges to so-called “pay-for-delay” settlements—in which brand-name drug makers temporarily keep generics out of the market by making payments to would-be competitors—got a booster shot this week with a big victory in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The First Circuit held on Monday that even when pay-for-delay settlements do not involve any cash payments, plaintiffs can still challenge those agreements as anticompetitive under the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in FTC v. Actavis, 133 S. Ct. 2223 (2013). The First Circuit held in In re Loestrin 24 Fe Antitrust Litig., Nos. 14-2071, 15-1250 (1st Cir. Feb. 22, 2016), that the Actavis

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

Quotation

Rosa M. Morales, The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit concludes that a reverse payment need not be in cash (Loestrin), 22 February 2016, e-Competitions Bulletin February 2016, Art. N° 80238

Visites 65

All issues

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