Intellectual Property Law Commons^™

The Ftc Has A Dog In The Patent Monopoly Fight: Will Antitrust’S Bite Kill Generic Challenges?, Jennifer D. Cieluch

Duke Law & Technology Review

Antitrust laws have been notoriously lenient in the patent realm, the underlying reason being that patents’ grant of exclusion create monopolies that defy antitrust laws in order to incentivize innovation. Thus, antitrust violations have rarely been found in the patent cases. But after the Supreme Court’s holding in FTC v. Actavis, brand name pharmaceutical companies may need to be more cautious when settling Hatch-Waxman litigation with potential patent infringers. Both brand-name drug manufacturers and generic drug manufacturers have incentives to settle cases by having the brand-name pay the generic in exchange for delaying their entry into the market. While courts …

The Rule Of Reason And The Scope Of The Patent, Herbert Hovenkamp

San Diego Law Review

For a century-and-a-half, the Supreme Court has described perceived abuses of patents as conduct that reaches "beyond the scope of the patent." That phrase, which evokes an image of boundary lines in real property, was applied to both government and private activity and came to have many different meanings. Sometimes it was used offensively to conclude that certain patent uses were unlawful because they extended beyond the scope of the patent. Later it came to be used defensively as well, to characterize activities as lawful if they did not extend beyond the patent's scope. In the first half of the …

Antitrust Issues In The Litigation And Settlement Of Infringement Claims, Deborah A. Coleman

Akron Law Review

Although the owner of intellectual property rights is privileged to enforce those rights through litigation and to settle such litigation on satisfactory terms, infringement actions or case settlements can create liability for antitrust violations or unfair competition. Most importantly, an agreement in restraint of trade is not sheltered from antitrust scrutiny because it is made in the context of settling threatened or actual infringement litigation. That a patent confers a limited legal monopoly in a product, method or process is only one fact that is taken into account in evaluating whether the terms under which infringement litigation is settled unfairly …

The Essential Facilities Doctrine In Information Economies: Illustrating Why The Antitrust Duty To Deal Is Still Necessary In The New Economy, Maxwell Meadows

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The New Plague: False Claims Liability Based On Inequitable Conduct During Patent Prosecution, Gregory Michael, William J. Newsom, Matthew Avery

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

In January 2009, Amphastar Pharmaceuticals filed a first of its kind qui tam suit on behalf of the federal government and several states alleging that its competitor, Aventis Pharma, violated the Federal False Claims Act (FCA) when it fraudulently acquired a patent and then overcharged the government for its patented drug. By utilizing a fraudulently acquired patent to elevate the price of Lovenox, a drug for treating deep-vein thrombosis, Amphastar alleged that Aventis had overcharged the government for every Lovenox pill purchased with government funds, including all prescriptions funded in part by Medicare or other federal insurance programs. The FCA …

Patent Punting: How Fda And Antitrust Courts Undermine The Hatch-Waxman Act To Avoid Dealing With Patents, Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Daniel A. Crane

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, patent law and FDA regulation work together to determine the timing of generic entry in the market for drugs. But FDA has sought to avoid any responsibility for reading patents, insisting that its role in administering the patent provisions of the Hatch-Waxman Act is purely ministerial. This gap in regulatory oversight has allowed innovators to use irrelevant patents to defer generic competition. Meanwhile, patent litigation has set the stage for anticompetitive settlements rather than adjudication of the patent issues in the courts. As these settlements have provoked antitrust litigation, antitrust courts have proven no more willing …

Promoting Innovation, Matthew Sag, Spencer Weber Waller

Faculty Articles

This Essay proceeds as follows. We briefly introduce the concept of creative destruction and its place in Schumpeter’s work in Part II. In Part III we explain why a truly Schumpeterian competition policy demands more than a laissez faire approach. We explain why the law must preserve opportunities and incentives for creative destruction at all stages of innovation and we review four key policy areas of antitrust law from this innovation-focused perspective: unilateral conduct cases (Part III.A), cases at the intersection of IP and antitrust (Part III.B), Sherman Act section 1 cases (Part III.C), and merger policy (Part III.D). In …

Living With Monsanto, 2015 Mich. St. L. Rev. 559 (2015), Daryl Lim

Faculty Scholarly Works

Bowman v. Monsanto Co. signaled the end of an era of seed saving. Farmers must buy new seed for replanting or risk patent infringement. The familiar rhetoric of oppressed farmers belies the fact that Monsanto’s success rests in part on farmers prizing its innovations. Current trends indicate that this reliance on Monsanto will continue. The Supreme Court correctly found for Monsanto. However, future cases must iron out the kinks in the Bowman decision. Despite the Court’s best intentions, inadvertence cannot shield farmers from patent infringement. The Court must also make it clear that patentees cannot use licensing restrictions to claw …

Living With Monsanto, Daryl Lim

Faculty Scholarly Works

Bowman v. Monsanto Co. signaled the end of an era of seed saving. Farmers must buy new seed for replanting or risk patent infringement. The familiar rhetoric of oppressed farmers belies the fact that Monsanto’s success rests in part on farmers prizing its innovations. Current trends indicate that this reliance on Monsanto will continue. The Supreme Court correctly found for Monsanto. However, future cases must iron out the kinks in the Bowman decision. Despite the Court’s best intentions, inadvertence cannot shield farmers from patent infringement. The Court must also make it clear that patentees cannot use licensing restrictions to claw …

Entering The Innovation Twilight Zone: How Patent And Antitrust Law Must Work Together, Jeffrey I.D. Lewis, Maggie Wittlin

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Patent law and antitrust law have traded ascendancy over the last century, as courts and other institutions have tended to favor one at the expense of the other. In this Article, we take several steps toward stabilizing the doctrine surrounding these two branches of law. First, we argue that an optimal balance between patent rights and antitrust enforcement exists that will maximize consumer welfare, including promoting innovation and economic growth. Further, as Congress is the best institution to find this optimum, courts should enforce both statutes according to their literal text, which grants absolute patent rights but allows for more …

How Not To Apply Actavis, Michael A. Carrier

NULR Online

No abstract provided.

Non-Price Competition In “Substitute" Drugs: The Ftc's Blind Spot, Gregory Dolin

All Faculty Scholarship

As the recent case of United States v. Lundbeck illustrates, the Federal Trade Commission’s lack of knowledge in medical and pharmacological sciences affects its evaluation of transactions between medical and pharmaceutical companies that involve transfers of rights to manufacture or sell drugs, causing the agency to object to such transactions without solid basis for doing so. This article argues that in order to properly define a pharmaceutical market, one must not just consider the condition that competing drugs are meant to treat, but also take into account whether there are “off-label” drugs that are used to treat a relevant condition, …

Patent Misuse And Antitrust: Rebirth Or False Dawn?, Daryl Lim

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

This Article examines how two recent cases, F.T.C. v. Actavis and Kimble v. Marvel Enterprises Inc. could affect both the equitable defense of patent misuse and the patent-antitrust interface more generally. It begins by tracing the history of patent misuse and its reformulation into an “antitrust-lite” doctrine by the Federal Circuit. This Article presents new empirical data confirming this reformulation, and unveils the surprising influence of the Seventh Circuit and the Chicago School on that reformulation. The Article then explores Actavis and Kimble. It explains why Actavis will catalyze more antitrust challenges when patent rights are exercised, and why it …

Pay-For-Delay Settlements In The Wake Of Actavis, Michael L. Fialkoff

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

“Pay-for-delay” settlements, also known as reverse payments, arise when a generic manufacturer pursues FDA approval of a generic version of a brand-name drug. If a patent protects the brand-name drug, the generic manufacturer has the option of contesting the validity of the patent or arguing that its product does not infringe the patent covering the brand-name drug. If the generic manufacturer prevails on either of these claims, the FDA will approve its generic version for sale. Approval of a generic version of a brand-name drug reduces the profitability of the brand-name drug by forcing the brand-name manufacturer to price its …

Aftermarketfailure: Windows Xp's End Of Support, Andrew Tutt

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

After 12 years, support for Windows XP will end on April 8, 2014. So proclaims a Microsoft website with a helpful clock counting down the days. "What does this mean?" the website asks. "It means you should take action." You should "migrate to a current supported operating system - such as Windows 8.1 - so you can receive regular security updates to protect [your] computer from malicious attacks." The costs of mass migration will be immense. About 30% of all desktop PCs are running Windows XP right now. An estimated 10% of the U.S. government's computers run Windows XP, including …

District Courts Versus The Usitc: Considering Exclusionary Relief For F/Rand-Encumbered Standard-Essential Patents, Helen H. Ji

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Technological standards allow manufacturers and consumers to rely upon these agreed-upon basic systems to facilitate sales and further invention. However, where these standards involved patented technology, the process of standard-setting raises many concerns at the intersection of antitrust and patent law. As patent holders advocate for their patents to become part of technological standards, how should courts police this activity to prevent patent holdup and other anti-competitive practices? This Note explores the differing approaches to remedies employed by the United States International Trade Commission and the United States District Courts where standard-essential patents are infringed. This Note further proposes that …

Actavis, The Reverse Payment Fallacy, And The Continuing Need For Regulatory Solutions, Daniel A. Crane

Articles

The Actavis decision punted more than it decided. Although narrowing the range of possible outcomes by rejecting the legal rules at the extremes and opting for a rule of reason middle ground, the opinion failed to grapple with the most challenging issues of regulatory policy raised by pharmaceutical patent settlements. In particular, it failed to clearly delineate the social costs of permitting and disallowing patent settlements, avoided grappling with the crucial issues of patent validity and infringement, and erroneously focused on “reverse payments” as a distinctive antitrust problem when equally or more anticompetitive settlements can be crafted without reverse payments. …

Intellectual Property Experimentalism By Way Of Competition Law, Tim Wu

Faculty Scholarship

Competition law and Intellectual Property have divergent intellectual cultures – the former more pragmatic and experimentalist; the latter influenced by natural law and vested rights. The US Supreme Court decision in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis is an intellectual victory for the former approach, one that suggests that antitrust law can and should be used to introduce greater scrutiny of the specific consequences of intellectual property grants.

Patent Dialogue, Jonas Anderson

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

This Article examines the unique dialogic relationship that exists between the Supreme Court and Congress concerning patent law. In most areas of the law, Congress and the Supreme Court engage directly with each other to craft legal rules. When it comes to patent law, however, Congress and the Court often interact via an intermediary institution: the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In patent law, dialogue often begins when Congress or the Supreme Court acts as a dialogic catalyst, signaling reform priorities to which the Federal Circuit often responds.

Appreciating the unique nature of patent dialogue has important …

The Need For Patent-Centric Standard Of Antitrust Review To Evaluate Reverse Payment Settlements, Tania Khatibifar

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

Reverse payment settlements have ignited a firestorm debate among all affected parties: consumer groups, brand-name pharmaceutical companies, generic manufacturers, pharmaceutical wholesalers and retailers, lawmakers, executive agencies, and the federal courts. The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has waged a decade-long battle against such private settlements of pharmaceutical patent litigation as illegal market-sharing agreements, with skirmishes among the circuits trending in favor of the settling parties until recently. The Third Circuit’s recent decision in In re K-Dur Antitrust Litigation unsettled this trend, and the Supreme Court granted the FTC’s petition for a writ of certiorari in a separate case on the issue …

From Microsoft To Google: Intellectual Property, High Technology, And The Reorientation Of U.S. Competition Policy And Practice, William E. Kovacic

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Ip Injury And The Institutions Of Patent Law, Paul Gugliuzza

Faculty Scholarship

This paper reviews Creation Without Restraint: Promoting Liberty and Rivalry in Innovation, the pathbreaking book by Christina Bohannan and Herbert Hovenkamp (Oxford Univ. Press 2012). The Review begins by summarizing the book’s descriptive insights and analyzing one of its important normative proposals: the adoption of an IP injury requirement. This requirement would demand that infringement plaintiffs prove -- before obtaining damages or an injunction -- an injury to the incentive to innovate. After explaining how this requirement is easy to justify under governing law and is largely consistent with recent Supreme Court decisions in the field of patent law, the …

Federal Trade Commission V. Actavis, Inc. And Reverse-Payment Or Pay-For-Delay Settlements, Jacob S. Sherkow

Articles & Chapters

An imminent US Supreme Court ruling should resolve one of the thorniest legal issues facing pharmaceutical companies today.

American Needle’S Progeny? Tennis And Antitrust, Ryan M. Rodenberg, Daniel Hauptman

Pace Intellectual Property, Sports & Entertainment Law Forum

Decided in the shadow of the U.S. Supreme Court’s May 2010 decision in American Needle v. NFL, Ryan M. Rodenberg and Daniel Hauptman analyze Deutscher Tennis Bund v. ATP World Tour (hereinafter DTB v. ATP) and aim to explain its implications for individual sports (e.g. tennis and golf) and sport governance generally. Treatment is afforded to both the District Court’s jury verdict and the Third Circuit’s appellate decision in DTB v. ATP. Despite being the first federal appellate sports antitrust decision rendered following American Needle, this article concludes that DTB v. ATP should not be considered an …

Continuing The Conversation Of "The Economic Irrationality Of The Patent Misuse Doctrine", Christa J. Laser

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

This Article uses economic tools to find the best way for courts to construe or for Congress to modify the patent misuse doctrine. It attempts to continue the conversation begun by Professor Mark Lemley in his often-cited Comment, The Economic Irrationality of the Patent Misuse Doctrine. It argues that a partial economic equilibrium in patent misuse doctrine can be achieved by attempting to match Congress’s intended patent scope with the actual patent scope. It then holds that the ideal patent misuse doctrine should (1) adequately discourage patentees from seeking to exceed their patent scope while (2) continuing to encourage innovation …

The Plumpy'nut Predicament: Is Compulsory Licensing A Solution?, Umar R. Bakhsh

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Antitrust Rulemaking As A Solution To Abuse On The Standard-Setting Process, Adam Speegle

Michigan Law Review

While many recognize the critical role that technology plays in modern life, few appreciate the role that standards play in contributing to its success. Devices as prevalent as the modern laptop computer for example, may be governed by over 500 interoperability standards, regulating everything from the USB drive to the memory chip. To facilitate adoption of such standards, firms are increasingly turning to standard-setting organizations. These organizations consist of members of an industry who agree to abide by the organization's bylaws, which typically regard topics such as patent disclosure and reasonable licensing. Problems arise, however, when members violate these bylaws …

Deviated, Unsound, And Self-Retreating: A Critical Assessment Of The Princo V. Itc En Banc Decision, Richard Li-Dar Wang

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

The licensing dispute between Philips and Taiwan CD-R/RW manufacturers has been a powerful generator of new developments in the field of patent and competition, which culminated with the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's Princo en banc decision in 2010. By adding new elements to the patent-misuse test, this decision confined the applicable area of the patent-misuse doctrine to the restrictions that patent owners impose on licensees, thus substantially constraining its scope and changing its landscape. After careful review of the Federal Circuit's holding and reasoning, this article finds that this decision deviating from United States Supreme …

"No Inventions, No Innovations": Reassessing The Government's Antitrust Case Against United States Steel Corporation, Guy B. Maseritz

Journal of Business & Technology Law

No abstract provided.

As Antitrust Case Ends, Microsoft Is Victorious In Defeat, Norman Hawker, Robert H. Lande

All Faculty Scholarship

As the final judgment in the celebrated Microsoft case ends, this piece very briefly assesses the impact of its remedy. When evaluated in terms of its most important goals, the remedy has proven to be a failure. Microsoft's monopoly power in the PC operating systems market is now as great as it was when the case was brought in 1998 or the remedy was ordered in 2002. The article also very briefly discusses the implications of this remedy for Google and AT&T.