Law Commons^™

A Machete For The Patent Thicket: Using Noerr-Pennington Doctrine’S Sham Exception To Challenge Abusive Patent Tactics By Pharmaceutical Companies, Lisa Orucevic

Vanderbilt Law Review

Outrageous drug prices have dominated news coverage of the American healthcare system for years. Yet despite widespread condemnation of skyrocketing drug prices, nothing seems to change. Pharmaceutical companies can raise drug prices with impunity because they hold patents on their drugs, which give them monopolies. These monopolies are only supposed to last twenty years, and then competing lower-cost drugs like generics can enter the market, driving down the costs of pharmaceuticals for all. But pharmaceutical companies have created “patent thickets,” dense webs of overlapping patents surrounding one drug, which have artificially extended the companies’ monopolies for years or even decades …

Antitrust Changeup: How A Single Antitrust Reform Could Be A Home Run For Minor League Baseball Players, Jeremy Ulm

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

In 1890, Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act to protect competition in the marketplace. Federal antitrust law has developed to prevent businesses from exerting unfair power on their employees and customers. Specifically, the Sherman Act prevents competitors from reaching unreasonable agreements amongst themselves and from monopolizing markets. However, not all industries have these protections.

Historically, federal antitrust law has not governed the “Business of Baseball.” The Supreme Court had the opportunity to apply antitrust law to baseball in Federal Baseball Club, Incorporated v. National League of Professional Baseball Clubs; however, the Court held that the Business of Baseball was not …

Writing Better Jury Instructions: Antitrust As An Example, Joshua P. Davis, Shannon Wheatman, Cristen Stephansky

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Patent Privateers And Antitrust Fears, Matthew Sipe

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Patent trolls are categorically demonized as threatening American innovation and industry. But whether they are a threat that antitrust law is equipped to deal with is a complex question that depends on the particular type of patent troll and activities they engage in. This Article looks specifically at privateer patent trolls: entities that acquire their patents from operating entities and assert them against other industry members. In the particular context of privateering, antitrust law is almost certainly not the proper legal solution. Privateering does raise significant issues: circumventing litigation constraints, evading licensing obligations, and raising the cost and frequency of …

The Corporate Antitrust Audit - Establishing A Document Retention Program, Sheldon S. Toll, Joseph P. Bauer

Joseph P. Bauer

No abstract provided.

The Arbitration Of Federal Domestic Antitrust Claims: How Safe Is The American Safety Doctrine?, Bruce R. Braun

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Antitrust, Health Care Quality, And The Courts, Peter J. Hammer, William M. Sage

Law Faculty Research Publications

Antitrust law represents the principal legal tool that the United States employs to police private markets, yet it often relegates quality and nonprice considerations to a secondary position. While antitrust law espouses the belief that vigorous competition will enhance quality as well as price, little evidence exists of the practical ability of courts to deliver on that promise. In this Article, Professors Hammer and Sage examine American health care as a vehicle for advancing understanding of the nexus among competition, quality, and antitrust law. The Article reports the results of a comprehensive empirical review of judicial opinions in health care …

Legal Factors In The Acquisition Of A United State Corporation: Litigation By Hostile Targets, Johan E. Droogmans

LLM Theses and Essays

Acquisitions of United States corporations have become increasingly complex takeover contests, where bidders and target corporations are forced into offensive and defensive litigation strategies to protect their respective interests. Targets often assert that the bidders have violated federal or state securities laws, federal antitrust laws, federal margin regulations, federal and state regulatory systems, and federal anti-racketeering laws. These lawsuits are primarily based on the principal federal regulation of takeovers in section 14(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and the Williams Act. Target litigation is customary, but entails certain disadvantages; a lawsuit rarely stops an offer, is expensive, …

The Corporate Antitrust Audit - Establishing A Document Retention Program, Sheldon S. Toll, Joseph P. Bauer

Journal Articles

Preventive maintenance is a doctrine with which lawyers are becoming—or should become—increasingly familiar. Since the field of antitrust law is potentially fraught with dire consequences for corporate clients, it is an area in which the doctrine of preventive maintenance should be liberally applied.

The Statute Of Limitations In Antitrust Litigation, Carl H. Fulda, Howard C. Klemme

Publications

No abstract provided.

The Statute Of Limitations In Antitrust Litigation Ii, Carl H. Fulda, Howard C. Klemme

Publications

No abstract provided.

Economic Considerations In The Enforcement Of The Antitrust Laws Of The United States, Ralph F. Fuchs

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.