In FTC v. Actavis, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a settlement in a patent infringement case in which the patent holder pays money to the alleged infringer not to introduce its product into the market could violate the antitrust laws under the Rule of Reason. The Court rejected the scope-of-the-patent doctrine that had been adopted […]
Category Archives: High Importance
US Supreme Court Permits Antitrust Challenges to Reverse Payment Settlements
September 8, 2013 – 11:40 am
US Supreme Court to Decide Whether Reverse Payment Settlements Between Patented and Generic Drug Manufacturers Violate the Antitrust Laws
January 15, 2013 – 12:48 pm
In Federal Trade Commission v. Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc., the US Supreme Court will review the Federal Trade Commission’s finding that Solvay Pharmaceuticals Inc. and several generic drug makers violated the antitrust laws by agreeing that Solvay would pay the generic companies to forestall challenges to the patent protecting its popular testosterone-replacement drug AndroGel. The FTC […]
Federal Circuit to Decide Whether Patent Fraud Antitrust Claims Can Be Asserted Independently of Infringement Claims and Amended Complaint Upheld in Related Flash Memory Monopolization Challenge
November 9, 2012 – 9:19 am
In Ritz Camera & Image LLC v. SanDisk Corp., the Federal Circuit will decide whether a firm that is not at risk of being sued for patent infringement can prosecute an antitrust claim based on fraudulently obtained patent. Defendant SanDisk Corp. argued that an affirmative decision would “open the floodgates” to litigation. The putative class […]
Conditioning Rebates on Percentage Purchased May Violate the Antitrust Laws Even If Prices are Above Cost
October 30, 2012 – 11:32 am
In ZF Meritor v. Eaton Corp., a divided panel of the Third Circuit upheld a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff truck transmission manufacturer against its competitor Eaton Corp. The complaint alleged that Eaton violated the antitrust laws by entering agreements with each large truck manufacturer that contained the following provisions: (1) Conditional rebate […]
Third Circuit and EU: Pay-for-Delay Generic Drug Settlement Can Violate Antitrust Law
August 7, 2012 – 4:20 pm
Update: The Third Circuit has refused to stay its ruling pending Supreme Court review. The defendant sought the stay in hopes of restraining the FTC and private plaintiffs from using the ruling to justify attacks on other drug patent settlements. In In re: K-Dur Antitrust Litigation, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit […]
Credit Card Companies Agree to Settle Merchant Fee Class Action, But Large Class Members Object
August 6, 2012 – 2:58 pm
Update: The court has held that the plaintiffs must formally seek approval of the proposed settlement by October 19, 2012. In In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation, the defendants have agreed to a $7.25 billion settlement of multidistrict litigation in the Eastern District of New York. Plaintiff merchants filed the […]
E-book Publishing Antitrust Case Filed
May 1, 2012 – 4:41 pm
The United States Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, and the European Commission have launched major antitrust initiatives against the e-book publishing industry and Apple. Both enforcers are attacking the publishers’ decisions to switch from a traditional resale model in which book sellers paid wholesale prices and set their own resale prices to an agency model […]
Text Messaging Case to Move Forward
May 22, 2011 – 6:51 pm
The Seventh Circuit in an interlocutory appeal written by Judge Richard Posner upheld the district judges decision in a multi-district litigation to allow an antitrust claim to move forward. The claim alleges a conspiracy among the largest cell phone providers to restrain competition with respect to text messages. Although the complaint did not allege direct […]
Antitrust Division Sues Credit Card Companies
October 12, 2010 – 1:40 pm
The United States Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, along with several states’ attorneys general have sued Visa, MasterCard, and American Express alleging that the card systems’ rules prohibiting merchants from offering discounts to consumers who use a particular card brand constitute unreasonable vertical agreements in restraint of trade. The Division simultaneously filed a proposed consent […]
California Rejects Pass-on Defense
August 17, 2010 – 10:04 am
The California Supreme Court has followed federal law in rejecting the pass-on defense, i.e. the argument that a defendant is not liable to a direct purchasing plaintiff for anticompetitive overcharges because the plaintiff passed on the overcharge to indirect purchasers. The court recognized two exceptions: (1) for cost-plus contracts that essentially require the direct purchaser […]