Supreme Court Declines To Hear Cardizem CD, Hytrin Antitrust Cases
This article was originally published in The Pink Sheet Daily
Executive Summary
The two cases created an apparent disagreement among the federal appellate circuits on the legality of “reverse payments” from a brand company to delay a generic’s entry.
You may also be interested in...
Abbott/Sandoz’ Hytrin Agreement Violates Antitrust Law, Judge Says
A provision under which Sandoz (formerly Geneva) agreed not to market generic terazosin until an appellate ruling in underlying patent litigation “exceeded the scope” of the potential exclusionary effect of Abbott’s patent, court says. The ruling marks the second time the judge has found the agreement to violate antitrust law.
Abbott/Sandoz’ Hytrin Agreement Violates Antitrust Law, Judge Says
A provision under which Sandoz (formerly Geneva) agreed not to market generic terazosin until an appellate ruling in underlying patent litigation “exceeded the scope” of the potential exclusionary effect of Abbott’s patent, court says. The ruling marks the second time the judge has found the agreement to violate antitrust law.
Cardizem CD Antitrust Ruling Should Stand, FTC Tells Supreme Court
Key aspects of the agreement between Andrx and Hoechst Marion Roussel, such as "reverse payments" and interim settlement, are unlikely to arise in future deals between brand and generic companies, the Federal Trade Commission and Solicitor General tell the high court.