Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Antitrust and Trade Regulation

External Link

Reverse payments

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Deactivating Actavis: The Clash Between The Supreme Court And (Some) Lower Courts, Joshua Davis, Ryan Mcewan May 2015

Deactivating Actavis: The Clash Between The Supreme Court And (Some) Lower Courts, Joshua Davis, Ryan Mcewan

Joshua P. Davis

Numerous trial courts have misinterpreted the Supreme Court’s recent decision in FTC v. Actavis, Inc. An interesting question is why they have done so. Perhaps lower courts disagree with the Supreme Court about so-called “reverse payment” cases, the subject of the Actavis opinion. Or perhaps they simply have made random mistakes, as is perhaps inevitable, particularly in a challenging area of the law like antitrust. This Article suggests an alternative account: that lower courts are seeking clear guidance from Actavis, clear guidance that the Supreme Court has not tended to provide in antitrust cases in general and that it did …


Applying Litigation Economics To Patent Settlements: Why Reverse Payments Should Be Per Se Illegal, Joshua P. Davis Dec 2008

Applying Litigation Economics To Patent Settlements: Why Reverse Payments Should Be Per Se Illegal, Joshua P. Davis

Joshua P. Davis

One of the most pressing issues in antitrust law is how to assess settlements of patent disputes that involve payments from brand name to generic drug manufacturers. At stake are billions of dollars, both in inflated prices to consumers attempting to meet their medical needs and in exposure to liability for drug manufacturers. This Article applies the economics of dispute resolution to clarify the costs and benefits of various approaches to assessing patent settlements in the context of the Hatch-Waxman Act. It concludes that reverse payments should be banned under a per se rule, unless and until courts are presented …