This article is part of a Chronicle. See more from this Chronicle
Ankur Kapoor, Rosa Morales, Apr 29, 2014
Nearly a year after the Supreme Court held in FTC v. Actavis that reverse-payment settlement agreements between branded and generic pharmaceutical companies are subject to antitrust scrutiny under the rule of reason, federal district courts are still struggling with such threshold questions as what constitutes a “payment” subject to antitrust challenge and whether only a monetary transfer from the patent holder to the alleged infringer can form the basis of an antitrust claim attacking the competitive effects of the settlement.
