The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that purchasers of a patented drug had antitrust standing to bring monopolization claims based on fraudulent patent procurement even though they would not have been able to directly challenge the patent’s validity. In another case, a district court decided that a race-tire manufacturer lacked the requisite antitrust injury to bring unlawful exclusive dealing claims against a competitor.
Other recent antitrust developments of note included provisional acceptance by the European Commission of a settlement proposal to remedy allegations that Microsoft tied its Internet browser to its dominant operating system in violation of European competition law.
Standing
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
