With the Supreme Court set to address the validity of "reverse payment" settlements of pharmaceutical patent litigation, the FTC released a summary of its new report, announcing that in 2012 drug companies entered "a record number" of such settlements. However, the underlying data and analysis merely highlight that the devil is in the definitions: over time the FTC has expanded its definition of the term "payments". Unless the Supreme Court moots this issue in FTC v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, 677 F.3d 1298 (11th Cir. 2012), cert. granted, 568 U.S. (U.S. Dec. 7, 2012) (No. 12-416), this far-reaching definition of "payment" may become the next critical front in the FTC's campaign against "reverse payment" settlements. The Dispute Over Reverse Payments In a "reverse payment" settlement
Share on
|
|
The US FTC releases a summary of its new report on pharma patent litigation finding an increase in reverse payment settlements based on an expanded definition of payments
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.
