Pending Bill Would Expand FTC Powers Over Drug Patent Settlements and Alter the Legal Test

by Dechert LLP
Contact

Key Points

  • This month several U.S. Senators introduced the Preserve Access to Affordable Generics Act. There is no similar bill pending in the U.S. House.
  • The Act revives legislative efforts to wipe out the majority court standard by treating “reverse payment” drug patent settlements as presumptively illegal.
  • The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) would enforce the Act in administrative litigation and collect penalties valued at three times the violators’ gains.
  • Drug manufacturers would have to notify the FTC of additional agreements relating to patent settlements.
Background

The recent U.S. Senate bill would expand FTC powers and alter the legal test governing drug patent settlements. See Preserve Access to Affordable Generics Act, S. 214, 113th Cong., 1st Sess. (2013). This bill is the most recent iteration of such legislation, and, aside from updated data, it mirrors bills introduced in 2009 and 2011. See S. 27, 112th Cong., 1st Sess. (2011); S. 369, 111th Cong., 1st Sess. (2009). 

The State of the Law in 2013

Under the prevailing “scope of the patent” test, “reverse payment” settlements are lawful as long as (1) the terms of the agreement do not exceed the patent’s scope, (2) the patent holder’s claim is not objectively baseless, and (3) the patent had not been procured by fraud on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The Second, Eleventh, and Federal Circuits have adopted this test, rejecting challenges to “reverse payment” settlements where the restrictions in the settlement agreement fell within the scope of the patent with respect to duration and the products covered.1 Last year, the Third Circuit in In re K-Dur Antitrust Litigation rejected the “scope of the patent” test and treated reverse payment settlements as presumptively unlawful under a quick look rule of reason analysis, which is the test the FTC has advocated for many years.2 Since the Third Circuit’s K-Dur decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari in an FTC case against Watson Pharmaceuticals (now known as Actavis) to consider the legality of “reverse payment” settlements. That case is set for argument on March 25, 2013.

New Legal Standard

The Preserve Access to Affordable Generics Act would establish a presumption of illegality whenever the accused infringer receives “anything of value” and “agrees to limit or forego research, development, manufacturing, marketing, or sales of” a drug “for any period of time.” The term “patent infringement claim” in the Act is not limited to claims made in litigation and extends to agreements in other settings.

To avoid liability for entering into a covered agreement, the settling parties must carry the burden of “demonstrat[ing] by clear and convincing evidence that the procompetitive benefits of the agreement outweigh the anticompetitive effects of the agreement.” In applying this “clear and convincing” test, the Act prohibits the fact finder from presuming “that entry would not have occurred until the expiration of the relevant patent or statutory exclusivity”—a presumption that the majority of courts have adopted and that is consistent with the statutory presumption of patent validity provided under the patent laws.

The Act would create an entirely new mode of antitrust analysis solely for covered settlement agreements. For one, the Act reverses the burden of proof. The parties to the agreement would have the burden of proving that the agreement is not anticompetitive. Under traditional antitrust analysis, a party challenging an agreement has the burden of showing that it is anticompetitive. In addition, the Act raises the standard of proof. Parties to the agreement must prove that the agreement is not anticompetitive with “clear and convincing” evidence, as compared to the lower preponderance of the evidence standard that is typically applied to other agreements.

The Act contains some limited carve-outs. An agreement falls outside the Act if the consideration received by the generic manufacturer consists of only one or more of the following: (1) “[t]he right to market the [product] in the United States prior to the expiration of” the patent; (2) “[a] payment of reasonable litigation expenses not to exceed $7,500,000”; or (3) “[a] covenant not to sue on any claim that the [generic product] infringes a United States patent.”

The FTC’s Enforcement Powers

The Act is enforceable not by private parties but only by the FTC in proceedings before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). ALJ decisions are appealable to the full Commission and then subject to judicial review in federal courts of appeals. The Act also gives the Commission authority to issue “regulations implementing and interpreting” the Act.  

Penalties

A company violating the Act may face a civil penalty up to three times the value received that is reasonably attributable to the violation. This penalty is payable to the United States. The generic drug manufacturer would also forfeit any 180-day marketing exclusivity.

Expanded Notice Requirement

Through the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA), Congress has required drug manufacturers to notify the FTC of drug patent settlements.3 The pending bill would expand this notice requirement to include additional agreements—“any other agreement” the parties enter into within 30 days of entering into an agreement covered by the MMA. Moreover, the pending bill requires parties to such agreements to certify that they have reported “the complete, final, and exclusive agreement between the parties.”

Likely Impact

If enacted, the Preserve Access to Affordable Generics Act would have the effect of gutting patent rights in a sector where innovation is vital to human health and welfare. The statutory presumption of patent validity would effectively disappear. Enforcing rights unquestionably within the scope of a patent may subject the patent holder to FTC litigation and large civil penalties. Moreover, this Act would undermine the goal of enhanced competition and lower drug prices. Generic drug manufacturers will be more reluctant to challenge patents because of the significant constraints this Act would place on the settlement options currently enjoyed by the parties to these disputes.

Ongoing Counseling in this Area

Repeated past legislative efforts to weaken drug patents in this manner have been unsuccessful. Thus, ongoing counseling in this area should not be impacted by the pendency of this Senate bill. A U.S. Supreme Court decision will likely be the next major development in this area and one that will guide future counseling for companies that have earned drug patents. A Supreme Court decision is expected by June.

Footnotes

1. See, e.g., FTC v. Watson Pharma., Inc., 677 F.3d 1298, 1309-10 (11th Cir. 2012); Ark. Carpenters H. & Welfare Fund v. Bayer AG, 604 F.3d 98, 106 (2d Cir. 2010); In re Ciprofloxacin Hydrochlo-ride Antitrust Litig., 544 F.3d 1323, 1335-36 (Fed. Cir. 2008); In re Tamoxifen Citrate Antitrust Litig., 466 F.3d 187, 213-15 (2d Cir. 2006); Schering-Plough Corp. v. FTC, 402 F.3d 1056, 1066 (11th Cir. 2005).

2. In re K-Dur Antitrust Litig., 686 F.3d 197, 218 (3d Cir. 2012).

3. See Pub. L. No. 108-173, §§ 1111-1117, 117 Stat. 2461-2463 (21 U.S.C. § 355 note).

To browse our library of legal updates, please visit dechert.com/publications

To see the full list of Antitrust/Competition lawyers, please visit our website.

 

 

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Dechert LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Dechert LLP
Contact
more
less

Dechert LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
Feedback? Tell us what you think of the new jdsupra.com!