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

  • Ashurst (Milan)
  • RSM US (New York)

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 US Private Enforcement, Art. N° 57726

Visites 246

All issues

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