News & Analysis as of

Anti-Competitive Pay-For-Delay

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

Jury Finds Gilead and Teva Did Not Engage in an Anticompetitive Pay-for-Delay Scheme for HIV Drugs

On June 30, 2023, a jury in the Northern District of California found Gilead and Teva not liable in a trial accusing the companies of engaging in an illegal reverse payment to delay generic versions of two HIV drugs, Truvada...more

A&O Shearman

The UK Competition and Markets Authority imposes record fines for excessive pricing and anti-competitive “pay-for-delay”...

A&O Shearman on

The UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has imposed over GBP260 million in fines on several drug makers for two breaches of competition law: (i) charging excessive and unfair prices, in breach of the Chapter II...more

A&O Shearman

Beyond “pay-for-delay” – the EU-Commission’s investigation into patent filing practices and communication measures

A&O Shearman on

On 4 March 2021, the European Commission (Commission) opened a formal investigation into alleged anti-competitive conduct by the pharmaceutical company Teva. The Commission suspects Teva of having deployed a strategy with the...more

Hogan Lovells

Pay for delay and document retention - The ECJ‘s Lundbeck decision

Hogan Lovells on

In the much-anticipated Lundbeck case (i.a. C-591/16 P), the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) on 25th March 2021 confirmed the decision of the European Commission (“Commission”) to impose fines on Lundbeck and several...more

MoFo Life Sciences

Pay-For-Delay Has A Tough (Antitrust) Time At EU Top Court

MoFo Life Sciences on

In recent years, there have been various antitrust investigations in the pharmaceutical sector resulting in decisions of the European Commission (EC) and the European Courts. In two recent rulings – “Lundbeck and...more

Latham & Watkins LLP

Pay-for-delay: Review of the ECJ judgment in Lundbeck (Citalopram)

Latham & Watkins LLP on

The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) has confirmed that pay-for-delay agreements with generic manufacturers ready to enter the market violate EU antitrust rules. ...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

AbbVie’s Enforcement of its ‘Patent Thicket’ For Humira Under the BPCIA Does Not Provide Cognizable Basis for an Antitrust...

In a recent decision in In Re Humira (Adalimumab) Antitrust Litigation, No. 19-cv-1873, Judge Shah of the Northern District of Illinois dismissed a consolidated class action complaint filed by U.S. purchasers of AbbVie Inc.’s...more

Hogan Lovells

The Court of Justice of the European Union provides clarifications on the assessment under competition law of pay-for-delay deals...

Hogan Lovells on

On 30 January 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued its decision on a request for preliminary ruling submitted by the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) in a case concerning the long-standing...more

WilmerHale

Unprecedented State Law on Pharmaceutical “Reverse Payments” Goes Into Effect

WilmerHale on

A new California law, Preserving Access to Affordable Drugs, AB-824 (the Act), which is aimed at curbing reverse-payment patent settlements, took effect on January 1. The Act codifies a presumption that any transfer of value...more

White & Case LLP

California's New Reverse Payment Law Departs from Supreme Court Standard in FTC v. Actavis

White & Case LLP on

On October 7, 2019, California became the first state to enact legislation—Assembly Bill 824 ("AB 824")—rendering certain pharmaceutical patent litigation settlement agreements presumptively anticompetitive. This alert...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Beware of Antitrust Risks When Settling Lawsuits With Competitors

Bad press. Burdensome and costly document and data collections. Unpredictable outcomes. The sometimes-slow pace of justice. It’s easy to understand why parties often prefer early settlement to fighting a lawsuit through trial...more

Dechert LLP

The Servier Judgment: A Breath of Fresh Air for Pharmaceutical Companies?

Dechert LLP on

On 12 December 2018, the General Court (“Court”) partially annulled the European Commission’s decision of 9 July 2014 in the Servier case and consequently reduced Servier’s fine by more than 30%, from €330.99 million to...more

Jones Day

European Commission Sets its Sights on Allegedly Excessive Drug Prices

Jones Day on

In the European Union, Big Pharma has been operating with a target on its back for the best part of the last decade. Following its 2008 sector inquiry into the pharmaceutical sector, the Commission vowed to clamp down on...more

Knobbe Martens

Supreme Court Will Not Review Pay-For-Delay Case over GSK’s Lamictal

Knobbe Martens on

On November 7, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review an appeal from a Third Circuit decision finding that a settlement between GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (Teva) involving the...more

Carlton Fields

Third Circuit Creates Framework for Analyzing Numerosity

Carlton Fields on

The Third Circuit recently vacated class certification, granted by the Eastern District of Pennsylvania after nearly a decade of litigation, in an antitrust case alleging that a pharmaceutical company entered into agreements...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

District Court Narrowly Defines the Relevant Market in Post-Actavis Pay-For-Delay Suit

On August 8, the District of Connecticut issued a noteworthy ruling on how to approach defining the relevant market definition in a pay-for-delay suit. In In re Aggrenox Antitrust Litigation, 3:14-md-02516 (D. Conn.), three...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

1st Circuit Joins 3rd Circuit: Non-Cash Reverse Payments Subject to Antitrust Scrutiny

Courts continue to evaluate the degree to which “reverse payments” are permitted post-Actavis. In the latest of these decisions, issued on February 22, 2016, the First Circuit held that non-cash payments may run afoul of the...more

Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner

Large ‘pay for delay’ fine imposed by CMA

On the 12th of February 2016, the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) fined GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and the successor companies to Alpharma Limited around £45m in total for breaches of Chapter I of the Competition Act...more

Pierce Atwood LLP

Comcast and its Discontents

Pierce Atwood LLP on

Shortly after the Supreme Court’s decisions in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011) and AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 321 (2011), I appeared before a federal district judge on a motion to dismiss...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Lupin Appeals Fine Imposed by European Commission in “Pay-For-Delay” Crackdown

In July of this year, the European Commission imposed fines on French pharmaceutical company Servier and five generic drug makers, including Lupin Ltd., totaling €427.7 million. The fines were the result of a five-year...more

Miller Canfield

Supreme Court Rules That Pay-For-Delay Settlements Subject To Antitrust Challenges

Miller Canfield on

Antitrust challenges to so-called “pay-for-delay” settlements in drug patent suits are allowed under the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc....more

21 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide