5 Arguments To Look For In Pay-For-Delay Cases

Law360, New York (June 18, 2013, 9:40 PM ET) -- When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that pay-for-delay deals may violate antitrust law, it largely left it up to the lower courts to figure out how to make the traditional rule-of-reason analysis work for the pharmaceutical patent settlements.

The five-justice majority tried to offer some guidance on what trial judges should look for while investigating whether a Hatch-Waxman Act patent settlement harms competition more than it promotes it. Among other things, the court suggested that an "unexplained large reverse payment" might indicate a weak underlying...
To view the full article, take a free trial now.
Try Law360 for free for seven days
Already a subscriber? Click here to login

Already have access?

  1. Forgot your password?
  2. Sign In

Get instant access to the one-stop news source for business lawyers