Is Any Consideration a “Payment”? The Continuing Struggle over How to Interpret FTC v. Actavis
Bloomberg BNA has published “Is Any Consideration a ‘Payment’? The Continuing Struggle over How to Interpret FTC v. Actavis,” written by Antitrust Partner Laura Shores and Complex Commercial Litigation Counsel Karin Garvey.
The article assesses the effects of the US Supreme Court decision regarding “reverse payment” settlements in branded-generic drug manufacturer patent litigation. The authors note that with little guidance in the initial decision issued slightly more than a year ago, lower courts are grappling with the threshold question, and, predictably, have reached different conclusions.
“A clear resolution is unlikely until the Supreme Court revisits the issue,” the authors conclude. “Until then, parties settling pharmaceutical patent litigation should be prepared for challenges to any settlement that involves more than an agreement on a generic entry date before patent expiration.”
Also of Interest
- NLJ Names Shores as Antitrust Trailblazer September 27, 2016 • Recognitions
- Consumer Products: Adapting to Innovation Fall 2016 • Reports / Newsletters
- ILS and Zinsser Analytic Shareholders Sell to Gardner Denver Medical September 2, 2016 • Client Successes
- Doing Deals with Competitors: Beware of Taking Minority Equity Stakes or Board Seats August 24, 2016 • Articles
- Best Lawyers 2017 Recognizes 41 Kaye Scholer Lawyers August 15, 2016 • Recognitions
- Handelsblatt Rechtsboard Publishes Steger’s Article on German Competition... July 25, 2016 • Articles
- Are You Acquiring Voting Securities with Investment Intent? It Depends on Who’s Asking July 22, 2016 • Client Alerts
- Three Kaye Scholer Partners Named Among Benchmark Litigation’s Top 250 Women... June 29, 2016 • Recognitions
- Kaye Scholer Practices and Attorneys Recognized by Chambers USA 2016 May 31, 2016 • Recognitions