By Michael A. Carrier
In this issue CPI includes a special feature on the SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. King Drug Co. of Florence (“King Drug”) case to be decided by the SCOTUS this fall.
In its 2013 decision in FTC v. Actavis, the U.S. Supreme Court held that agreements by which brand-name drug companies pay generic firms to settle patent litigation and delay entering the market could have “significant adverse effects on competition” and violate antitrust laws. Since the decision, courts have wrestled with various issues. The question that has received the most attention is whether “payment” is limited to cash or encompasses non-cash forms of consideration.
In this article, Michael A. Carrier examines the reasons why the SCOTUS should grant or should deny certiorari to the petitioners
