United States: The U.S. Supreme Court issues a landmark decisions in relation to “reverse payment” settlements and rules that such agreements should be subject to "rule of reason" analysis (Actavis)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. In recent weeks, the Supreme Court has issued several important decisions concerning the pharmaceutical industry (Mutual Pharmaceutical Co., Inc. v. Bartlett, 570 U.S. __, 2013; Association for Molecular Pathology et al. v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. __, 2013), but it is undoubtedly the case of FTC v. Actavis Inc. that deserves comment in our column (No. 12-416, 540 U.S. __, 2013). In this decision of June 17, 2013, the Supreme Court ruled for the first time on "reverse payment settlements" and provided important clarifications as to how U.S. authorities and courts should assess these practices. The General Context of Deferral Arrangements It should be