Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
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 …
Antitrust As Regulation, Alan Devlin
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 …
An Examination Of The Current Status Of Rating Agencies And Proposals For Limited Oversight Of Such Agencies, Francis A. Bottini Jr.
An Examination Of The Current Status Of Rating Agencies And Proposals For Limited Oversight Of Such Agencies, Francis A. Bottini Jr.
San Diego Law Review
This Comment analyzes the market for ratings of both financial securities and insurance companies, and finds significant problems with rating agencies, such as lethargy in changing ratings, political influence, unsolicited ratings, and inaccurate ratings. To ensure that the federal securities laws continue to protect investors, this Comment recommends limited oversight of rating agencies. It proposes that Congress enact legislation granting the Securities and Exchange Commission explicit authority to mandate that all nationally recognized statistical rating organizations register with the SEC, and to establish minimum standards for their designation. Finally, the Comment examines First Amendment concerns associated with the regulation of …