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.
You may also be interested in...
FTC Wins Backing Over Pay-For-Delay Decision
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.
FTC Makes Double Reverse Payment Case Against Endo And Impax
The generic firm essentially paid the brand to keep its product off the market, FTC alleges in case about Opana ER litigation. Endo considered bringing back its original formulation of oxymorphone but instead reached agreement with Impax to share profits of its generic, antitrust suit claims.
FTC Focus On Pay-For-Delay Deals Continues; Endo Agrees To 10-Year Abstention
In addition to settling with Endo, FTC refiles charges against Watson (now Teva), Allergan and Impax involving Lidoderm and Opana ER patent litigation settlements.