The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has overturned the dismissal of two antitrust suits over “reverse settlements” in which patent holders sought to delay the sale of generic versions of blockbuster drugs.
Challenges to those deals, popularly called “pay for delay,” must meet the standard of “ordinary plausibility,” the panel said in an opinion applying the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, which ruled that payments from patent holders to infringers through reverse payment settlement agreements are subject to antitrust scrutiny.
This content has been archived.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]
