Law Commons^™

The Duality Of Provider And Payer In The Current Healthcare Landscape And Related Antitrust Implications, Julia Kapchinskiy

San Diego Law Review

Health care landscape has changed with the introduction of the ACA and will keep changing due to the proposed repeal. The only constant is the desire of health plans and providers to maximize profits and minimize costs, which is attainable through consolidation. This Comment advocates a revision of the existing antitrust guidelines that would (1) recognize unique nature of health care market, (2) be independent from the current or proposed legislation to the maximum possible extent, and (3) reflect the insurer-provider duality, which heavily influences the quality and accessibility of the healthcare for the consumer.

Update On Antitrust And Pay-For-Delay: Evaluating “No Authorized Generic” And “Exclusive License” Provisions In Hatch-Waxman Settlements, Saami Zain

San Diego Law Review

In Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, the United States Supreme Court held that a patent litigation settlement where a branded drug company pays a generic drug company to end the litigation and delay launching its generic may violate the antitrust laws. Although the decision ended years of controversy over whether such settlements were subject to antitrust scrutiny, many issues remain unresolved concerning the lawfulness of these settlements. In particular, courts have struggled in assessing the legality of patent settlements between branded and generic drug manufacturers involving non-cash compensation or benefits. This article discusses one type of non-cash compensation that is …

Looking For Venue In The Patently Right Places: A Parallel Study Of The Venue Act And Venue In Anda Litigation, Mengke Xing

San Diego Law Review

Like any other type of litigation, venue is often an important strategic decision for patent infringement litigants. Under the traditional nation-wide venue rule, a patent owner was able to sue a corporate defendant almost in every district in the country, giving rise to abusive forum shopping and the popularity of the Eastern District of Texas. Last year, the Supreme Court in TC Heartland dramatically changed the legal framework of venue in patent litigation, while leaving some issues unaddressed. After a discussion of the evolvement of venue laws and the significance of TC Heartland, this Comment focuses on the Venue Equity …

The Never-Ending Quest For Clarity Amidst Uncertainty: Hospital M&A And Antitrust Scrutiny, Ross E. Bautista

San Diego Law Review

Although critics say hospitals justify mergers in the same way as they did during the M&A boom of the 1990s, these critics frequently link the current wave of mergers with the purpose of becoming more integrated and efficient to achieve the level of cost savings and improved quality that the United States and patients currently require. However, the results from hospital consolidation remain uncertain because of the limited and mixed evidence about its impact on quality of care and price. Part I of this Article discusses the recent surge in hospital M&A activity. Part II brings some clarity by discussing …

Antitrust As Regulation, Alan Devlin

San Diego Law Review

Antitrust, properly understood, plays a modest role in constraining commercial behavior. With respect to unilateral conduct, it does not prohibit monopoly or the fortuitous or quality-based acquisition of the same. It generally permits dominant companies to enjoy the fruits of their positions and does not speak to the propriety of excessive pricing. It does not impose service obligations on monopolists, nor does it generally limit their right to price discriminate amongst their consumers. It merely prohibits monopolists' artificial creation of impediments to competition--so-called exclusionary practices. With respect to concerted behavior, the law allows a vast swathe of private agreements, even …

Likelihood Of Confusion

San Diego Law Review

The primary objective of this Article is to illustrate the tendency of judges to inappropriately rely on personal intuition and subjective, internalized stereotypes when ruling on trademark disputes. Where jurists perceive consumers as ludicrously easily confused, trademark holders can exploit these views to secure broad trademark “rights,” often without offering a shred of evidentiary corroboration concerning such confusion. As a consequence, the proof required to support allegations that a trademark usage creates a likelihood of confusion is potentially lessened in all cases, making trademarks normatively stronger, broader, and ever easier to “protect” for mark holders. Whether consumers realistically benefit from …

The Market Power Requirement In Antitrust Rule Of Reason Cases: A Rhetorical History, Mark R. Patterson

San Diego Law Review

Under section 1 of the Sherman Act,' on which this Article will focus, a central position for market power has been mandated neither by statute nor by the Supreme Court. Section 1 refers only to "contract[s] ... in restraint of trade,"' language that suggests no market power requirement. Nor has the Supreme Court imposed any general market power requirement under section 1. To be sure, the Court has imposed market power requirements in certain categories of section 1 cases, but they are only those cases in which the plaintiff proceeds under a per se theory.' Indeed, the Court has on …

Should A Possession Or Use Standard Be Employed To Prove Insider Trading?

San Diego Law Review

This Comment endorses the legislative adoption of an initial rebuttable presumption in favor of the complainant in insider trading cases. This presumption would create a strong inference of "actual use"

upon proof that the defendant was in possession of material and non- public information at the time he consummated a securities transaction.

Moreover, the inference would establish a prima facie case of insider trading sufficient to withstand summary judgment. This Comment argues that such a presumption is appropriate as it is consistent with the plain language of section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 19345

and SEC Rule lOb-5. …

Extraterritorial Application Of Antitrust Laws And The U.S.-Eu Dispute Over The Boeing And Mcdonnell Douglas Merger: From Comity To Conflict? An Argument For A Binding International Agreement On Antitrust Enforcement And Dispute Resolution

San Diego Law Review

Due to the increase of "mega-mergers" between corporations trying to compete in the global economy, cross-border regulation of mergers and acquisitions by both the United States and the European Union has become much more common. 5 Until recently, such reviews and regulatory acts by foreign regulators only rarely caused trade disputes or tensions in diplomatic relations.' In order to maintain cooperation and prevent serious disputes over regulation of each other's domestic corporations, the United States and the European Union entered into an agreement on the application of antitrust laws in 1991.

Antitrust-Doctrine Of In Pari Delicto Held Not To Be Recognized As A Defense In Private Antitrust Action To Bar Recovery By A Plaintiff Who Was A Party To An Agreement Allegedly Containing Terms In Violation Of Antitrust Laws. Perma Life Mufflers, Inc. V. International Parts Corp. (U.S. 1968), Peter K. Nunez

San Diego Law Review

This recent case discusses Perma Life Mufflers, Inc. v. International Parts Corp. (U.S. 1968).