The US Supreme Court rules that a payment by a patentee to a generic manufacturer may constitute an infringement of antitrust law (Actavis)

Ullman, Howard M.

Previous article The US Supreme Court holds that reverse-payment in patent settlements should be reviewed under the antitrust rule of reason (Actavis) Next article The UK OFT issues statement of objections to four pharma companies alleging they acted to delay effective competition in the national supply of antidepressant medicine (GSK / GUK / Alpharma / IVAX)

17 Jun 2013

The US Supreme Court rules that a payment by a patentee to a generic manufacturer may constitute an infringement of antitrust law (Actavis)

KEYWORDS

Reference

US Supreme Court, Actavis, Judgement No. 12-416, 17 June 2013

Why FTC v. Actavis Won’t Shift the Border Between IP and Antitrust Law* The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc., No. 12-416, U.S (2013), has generated a lot of commentary recently. Some articles have suggested that the decision may expose certain intellectual property (IP) licensing decisions to antitrust scrutiny that prior to Actavis would have been

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

Howard M. Ullman
Dechert (San Francisco)

United States 25 contributions 8719 visits

Quotation

Howard M. Ullman, The US Supreme Court rules that a payment by a patentee to a generic manufacturer may constitute an infringement of antitrust law (Actavis), 17 June 2013, e-Competitions Pay-for-delay agreements, Art. N° 57325

Visites 594