Feature

Actavis At 5: Where Pay-For-Delay Litigation Stands

Law360 (August 6, 2018, 6:47 PM EDT) -- It’s been a little over five years since the U.S. Supreme Court issued its landmark Actavis decision that found payments made by brand-name drugmakers to generics makers in patent settlements can raise antitrust concerns. But uncertainty over which pay-for-delay deals actually are illegal continues and recent lower court rulings have cut both ways, with some cases fizzling out and others forging ahead.

Here, Law360 looks at some of those recent rulings and where pay-for-delay litigation currently stands.

First Circuit

Case: In re: Loestrin 24 Fe Antitrust Litigation

Court: District of Rhode Island

Drug: Loestrin, oral contraceptive

Status: Discovery, awaiting ruling on...

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.


  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Beta
Ask a question!