A US Court of Appeals applies a quick look rule of reason and rejects scope of the patent test when considering whether pharma patent settlement violates the antitrust laws (Schering-Plough)

In our post, “Hot Ticket Item – Patent Settlement Agreement Challenges,” we provided a round-up of the latest and greatest from ongoing litigation concerning patent settlement agreements (or “pay-for-delay” agreements if you prefer that term – we don’t). It’s only been about three weeks since that post, but a lot more has already happened to warrant another update. And it all relates back – in some way, shape, or form – to the July 16, 2012 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in In Re: K-DUR Antitrust Litigation. In that case, the Court rejected the so-called “scope of the patent test” when considering whether patent settlement agreements violate the antitrust laws, and instead applied a “quick look rule of reason” analysis under which “the finder of fact must treat any

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

Kurt R. Karst, A US Court of Appeals applies a quick look rule of reason and rejects scope of the patent test when considering whether pharma patent settlement violates the antitrust laws (Schering-Plough), 16 July 2012, e-Competitions Bulletin Competition in the Pharmaceutical sector, Art. N° 53016

Visites 128

All issues

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