The U.S. Court of Appeals applies the rule of reason and rejects scope of the patent test when 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

  • Hyman, Phelps & McNamara (Washington DC)

Quotation

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

Visites 135

All issues

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