Tag: pay for delay

Displaying 1 - 20 of 51 results.

Pages

The Federal Trade Commission has filed an amicus brief in Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. v Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) Inc., which is a patent infringement case pending before the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.
Brief of the Federal Trade Commission urging the District of New Jersey to reject argument that Hatch-Waxman patent infringement suits are categorically exempt from antitrust scrutiny as potential sham litigation, because the argument is contrary to the statutory text and case law...
In an Initial Decision announced on May 18, 2018, Chief Administrative Law Judge D. Michael Chappell dismissed the antitrust charges in a complaint issued by the Federal Trade Commission against generic pharmaceutical company Impax Laboratories, Inc.
In testimony presented to the U.S. House of Representatives’ Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commerical and Antitrust Law, the Federal Trade Commission described its efforts to stop anticompetitive conduct in the pharmaceutical industry.
The Federal Trade Commission has approved the appointment of Quantic Regulatory Services, LLC as monitor in its case alleging that Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. violated antitrust laws by using pay-for-delay settlements to block consumers’ access to lower-cost generic versions of Opana ER and Lidoderm.
The FTC's complaint alleges that Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and several other drug companies violated antitrust laws by using pay-for-delay settlements to block consumers’ access to lower-cost generic versions of Lidoderm.  The agreement not to market an authorized generic – often...
The FTC's administrative complaint against Impax charges that in 2010, Impax and Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. illegally agreed that Impax would not compete by marketing a generic version of Endo’s Opana ER until January 2013. In exchange, Endo paid Impax more than $112 million.Endo...
The Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint in federal district court alleging that Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and several other drug companies violated antitrust laws by using pay-for-delay settlements to block consumers’ access to lower-cost generic versions of Opana ER and Lidoderm.Following...
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).
Pharmaceutical companies entered into substantially fewer potential pay-for-delay patent dispute settlements in fiscal year 2014, according to a new FTC staff report.

Pages