Comments on: Supreme Court Agrees To Tackle Drug Patent Settlements

By: Bio-Pharma at the U.S. Supreme Court | IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law

Fri, 19 Apr 2013 13:15:20 +0000

[...] Court Agrees to Tackle Drug Patent Settlements [...]

By: Brian Miller

Brian Miller — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 12:10:21 +0000

Hi Michael: I’m a weekend student at Hamline Law School in Saint Paul, Minnesota, and I’m also employed in the Pharmaceutical industry. For a class I’m in, I need to summarize an article about a legal trend, and I plan on referring to your article. Have you done any follow-up commentary on this particular article or subject? Best Regards: Brian Miller
via Cell 952-452-1953

By: Pharma Law and Business - A Monthly Roundup December 2012 | IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law

Thu, 13 Dec 2012 17:06:01 +0000

[...] the Supreme Court did agree to review pay-to-delay deals, a description for patent settlements between brand-name drug makers and their generic [...]

By: Bob Marshall

Bob Marshall — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 19:20:33 +0000

Payments from the patent holder/brand name drug manufacter to a potential generic drug competitor need not be anticompetitive.
Patent litigation is very expensive. The brand name drug maker could easily spend plural millions of dollars, even plural tens of millions of dollars, in this litigation even if it wins and validates the patent.
A rational business may easily agree to spend less that it’s potential litigation costs to settle the lawsuit even if it believes that patent will be upheld. Such a settlement would reduce transactions costs for both drug makers to the benefit of their customers and owners. The only “losers” in this case would be the outside lawyer-litigators.
The FTC position seems to require these cases to be fully litigated to the benefit of the outside lawyer-litigators.