Cipro, Nolvadex Settlements No “Barr” To Generic Entrants, Courts Say
Executive Summary
Barr's agreements settling ciprofloxacin and tamoxifen patent litigation with Bayer and AstraZeneca did not prevent other generic companies from attempting to enter the market, two courts recently concluded
You may also be interested in...
Court OKs Bayer’s Cipro reverse settlement
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a district court ruling that Bayer's payment to Barr and Hoechst Marion Roussel (now Sanofi-Aventis) to delay their marketing of generic Cipro (ciprofloxacin) does not violate federal antitrust law. The lower court ruled in 2003 that the deal to settle Cipro patent litigation was not inherently anticompetitive because it did not exceed the scope of Bayer's patent (1"The Pink Sheet," May 26, 2003, p. 12). The case, In Re: Ciprofloxacin Hydrochloride Antitrust Litigation, was brought by direct and indirect purchasers led by the Arkansas Carpenters Health and Welfare Fund
Court OKs Bayer’s Cipro reverse settlement
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a district court ruling that Bayer's payment to Barr and Hoechst Marion Roussel (now Sanofi-Aventis) to delay their marketing of generic Cipro (ciprofloxacin) does not violate federal antitrust law. The lower court ruled in 2003 that the deal to settle Cipro patent litigation was not inherently anticompetitive because it did not exceed the scope of Bayer's patent (1"The Pink Sheet," May 26, 2003, p. 12). The case, In Re: Ciprofloxacin Hydrochloride Antitrust Litigation, was brought by direct and indirect purchasers led by the Arkansas Carpenters Health and Welfare Fund
Bayer Cipro XR Will Ship Jan. 2; Complicated UTI Indication Pending
Bayer plans to ship Cipro XR (ciprofloxacin extended release) to pharmacies on Jan. 2, 2003