Previous business/academic article Next business/academic article
Business Articles Awards > Economics

Activating Actavis: A More Complete Story

Barry C. Harris, Kevin M. Murphy, Robert D. Willig, and Matthew B. Wright, Antitrust, Vol. 28, No. 2, Spring 2014

See Barry C. Harris's resume See Kevin M. Murphy 's resume See Robert D. Willig's resume See Matthew Wright's resume

Click here to read the full article online

In FTC v. Actavis, Inc. the Supreme Court asked whether a patent settlement agreement involving a so-called reverse payment from an incumbent producer (Brand) to an alleged infringer of a pharmaceutical patent (Generic) “can sometimes unreasonably diminish competition in violation of the antitrust laws.” The Actavis Court answered this question in the affirmative, rejecting the Eleventh Circuit’s ruling that held that patent settlement agreements generally were lawful as long as their potential anticompetitive effects fell within the scope of the patent.

© 2017 - Institute of Competition Law Download our brochure