Lamictal Pay-For-Delay Case Not Best High Court Lure

By Eric Kroh (October 6, 2016, 7:15 PM EDT) -- The government has asked the U.S. Supreme Court not to review a Third Circuit decision in a pay-for-delay case against GlaxoSmithKline and Teva over the anticonvulsant Lamictal, and experts said the court ought to look elsewhere for a good vehicle to clarify its landmark 2013 holding in Actavis.

In an amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court on Monday, the U.S. solicitor general said the court should let stand a June 2015 finding by the Third Circuit that a 2005 patent dispute settlement between GlaxoSmithKline LLC and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. raised antitrust scrutiny even though no cash payment was involved....

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!


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?
Ask a question!