The Best Rule Of Reason For Pay-For-Delay

Law360, New York (July 18, 2013, 1:48 PM EDT) -- The U.S. Supreme Court’s anxiously awaited ruling in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis Inc. established that “reverse payments” or “pay-for-delay” settlements, as they occur in the context of Hatch-Waxman Act provisions, may violate antitrust law. While the majority opinion dashed the defendant’s contention that such settlements should be presumed legal if within the confines of the patent’s scope, neither did it embrace the FTC’s position that pay-for-delay settlements are per se illegal, or at least illegal as a rebuttable presumption.

Navigating in the middle of the...
To view the full article, register now.
Law360 Pro Say Podcast
Check out Law360's new podcast, Pro Say, which offers a weekly recap of both the biggest stories and hidden gems from the world of law.