The US Supreme Court holds that patent protection does not confer immunity from antitrust attack (Actavis)

U.S. Supreme Court reverses Eleventh Circuit opinion in FTC v. Actavis, Inc* On 17 June 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court (“the Court”) reversed a decision by the Court of Appeals (Eleventh Circuit). The Court of Appeals had upheld a dismissal of a complaint made by the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), which claimed that a reverse payment settlement agreement between certain pharmaceutical companies (Actavis, Inc., Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Paddock Laboratories, and Par) violated U.S. antitrust law. In brief, a reverse payment settlement agreement is one in which, in order to settle a dispute between the alleged patent infringer and the patentee, the patent holder pays the alleged infringer a considerable amount of money to keep the alleged infringer’s product off the market. Under the

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

Authors

Quotation

Gabriele Accardo, Anthony Reda, The US Supreme Court holds that patent protection does not confer immunity from antitrust attack (Actavis), 17 June 2013, e-Competitions Bulletin Competition in the Pharmaceutical sector, Art. N° 57726

Visites 182

All issues

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