Recent Cases Provide Hope For Reverse-Payment Defendants

By David Kully and Charles Weiss (September 21, 2017, 2:00 PM EDT) -- Over four years have now passed since the U.S. Supreme Court shook up the pharmaceutical industry by ruling in FTC v. Actavis Inc. that "large and unjustified" payments from brand manufacturers to generic manufacturers to settle infringement litigation "can sometimes violate the antitrust laws."[1] As litigation over "reverse payment" claims has played out in the intervening years, lower court have naturally attempted to supply further clarity to the Supreme Court's somewhat vague dictates, with recent cases concluding, for instance, that "payments" encompasses more than just a monetary exchange between brand and generic manufacturers,[2] and that plaintiffs can meet their pleading obligations concerning the existence of a "large" payment without asserting facts revealing the actual size of the payment.[3]...

Law360 is on it, so you are, too.

A Law360 subscription puts you at the center of fast-moving legal issues, trends and developments so you can act with speed and confidence. Over 200 articles are published daily across more than 60 topics, industries, practice areas and jurisdictions.

A Law360 subscription includes features such as

  • Daily newsletters
  • Expert analysis
  • Mobile app
  • Advanced search
  • Judge information
  • Real-time alerts
  • 450K+ searchable archived articles

And more!

Experience Law360 today with a free 7-day trial.

Start Free Trial

Already a subscriber? Click here to login

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!