FTC Wins Backing Over Pay-For-Delay Decision
Appeals Court Upholds FTC Findings In Impax-Endo Reverse-Payment Case
Executive Summary
The FTC has won the backing of an appeals court over its 2019 decision that found a reverse-payment settlement deal between Impax and Endo over Opana ER to be anti-competitive and illegal.
You may also be interested in...
FTC v. Endo: Exclusive Licenses, ‘Supracompetitive Prices’ Are Protected By Patent Laws
In an unsealed redacted opinion dismissing FTC’s complaint, district judge says Endo’s agreement with Impax, which left it the sole marketer of oxymorphone ER, falls within the bounds of anticompetitive activity protected by patent laws.
FTC v. Endo: Exclusive Licenses, ‘Supracompetitive Prices’ Are Protected By Patent Laws
In an unsealed redacted opinion dismissing FTC’s complaint, district judge says Endo’s agreement with Impax, which left it the sole marketer of oxymorphone ER, falls within the bounds of anticompetitive activity protected by patent laws.
No-Authorized Generic Commitments Disappear From US Settlements
Compiling data from the 2017 fiscal year, a new US Federal Trade Commission report reveals that no patent-litigation settlement agreement contained a no-AG commitment, although several did contain extraordinary forms of compensation or side deals that went beyond the payment of litigation fees.