Tag: pay for delay

Displaying 1 - 20 of 33 results.

Pages

For more than 15 years, one of the FTC’s top priorities has been to put an end to anticompetitive reverse-payment settlements between brand-name drug makers and their potential generic rivals. In our view, these settlements are anticompetitive agreements not to compete in which the...
There is a basic but important difference between antitrust cases brought by the government and those brought by private parties: All plaintiffs, including government enforcers like the FTC, must prove an antitrust violation, which requires showing harm to competition. But private...
Since 2004, brand-name and generic drug manufacturers have filed certain agreements with the FTC and DOJ as required by the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act (also known as MMA filings).
In Fiscal Year 2013, companies filed a total of 145 final patent dispute settlements, of which 29 created potential “pay-for-delay” agreements between branded and generic drug companies, according to a new Federal Trade Commission staff report.  Although the number of potential pay-for-delay...
In a recently published article, we discuss our finding that generic drug companies successfully use low-pricing strategies to discourage entry by new competitors in certain circumstances.
Brief of the Federal Trade Commission as amicus curiae urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to reverse a district court determination that a brand-name drug manufacturer’s commitment not to introduce an authorized generic version of its own brand-name drug in...
In testimony presented to a U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary subcommittee the Federal Trade Commission described its ongoing efforts to protect competition and consumers in many important sectors of the economy, including health care, pharmaceuticals, and technology.
The Federal Trade Commission has asked the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey to accept an amicus brief that addresses the application of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in FTC v. Actavis to a patent settlement containing a “no-authorized-generic” commitment.
The Federal Trade Commission told a Senate Judiciary subcommittee today that it will continue to challenge anticompetitive pay-for-delay court settlements in the pharmaceutical industry, and that the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in FTC v. Actavis “is an important victory for consumers and a...
Federal Trade Commission Chairwoman Edith Ramirez issued the following statement regarding today's decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in FTC v. Actavis, Inc., which held that pay-for-delay agreements between brand and generic drug companies are subject to antitrust scrutiny.
Federal Trade Commission Chairwoman Edith Ramirez released the agency’s 2012-2013 Annual Highlights today at the Spring Meeting of the American Bar Association’s Section of Antitrust Law in Washington, D.C., recognizing the FTC’s continued efforts to protect consumers and promote competition.
In Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, the number of potentially anticompetitive patent dispute settlements between branded and generic drug companies increased significantly compared with FY 2011, jumping from 28 to 40, according to a new Federal Trade Commission staff report.  The study also found that in...
FTC Files Amicus Brief in Support of Rehearing of Ciprofloxacin "Pay-for-Delay" Case The Federal Trade Commission has filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, recommending that it hold a rehearing before all the judges ("en banc") of the Ciprofloxacin (Cipro) "pay...
Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz issued the following statement regarding today’s decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which invited the plaintiffs in the Ciprofloxacin drug patent settlement case to seek further review by the full court of appeals because...
Today’s decision seems to reflect a growing understanding—first in Congress now in the courts—that brand name drug companies must not be allowed to make pay-offs to their generic competitors to keep low-cost generic drugs off the market. These deals are costing American consumers $3.5 billion a...

Pages