The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is seeking to apply its success before the U.S. Supreme Court to another type of patent settlement.
The agency has asked the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey to accept its amicus brief in In re Effexor XR Antitrust Litigation. The Federal Trade Commission brief argues in favor of applying the precedent established in FTC v. Actavis to a settlement agreement based on a “no-authorized-generic” commitment.
The Supreme Court ruled that “pay-to-delay” agreements, under which brand name drug companies make payments to would-be competitors who make generic substitutes to keep the generic substitutes out of the market, can be subject to anti-trust scrutiny.
In the instant case, Wyeth Pharmaceutical Co. agreed not to compete with an authorized generic version of the drug Effexor XR to induce Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. to abandon its patent challenge and refrain from selling its generic version of Effexor XR for two years. Brand-name drug makers manufacture authorized generic drugs as a way to ward of generic sales, particularly during the 180-day exclusivity period reserved for the first-filing generic under the Hatch-Waxman Act.
The pharmaceutical companies argue that the settlement should be immune from antitrust scrutiny because delayed entry was secured by a non-compete agreement rather than cash. Meanwhile, the Federal Trade Commission argues that “accepting the defendants’ claim of immunity whenever patentees use vehicles other than cash to share the profits from an agreement to avoid competition elevates form over substance, and it would allow drug companies to easily circumvent the ruling in Actavis, at great cost to consumers.”
It is unclear if the court will accept the amicus brief. A ruling is expected this month.
If you have any questions about this case or would like to discuss the legal issues involved, please contact me, Fred Zemel, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.
High-profile founder litigation is more than just a media spectacle. For startup founders, these cases underscore the legal and structural risks that can arise when rapid growth outpaces formal oversight. While launching a new company can be both an exciting and deeply rewarding endeavor, founders must be mindful that it also comes with significant risks. […]
Corporate Governance Reviews: A Practical Guide for New Jersey Companies
Every New Jersey company should periodically evaluate its governance framework. Strong corporate governance protects directors and officers, builds investor confidence, reduces litigation exposure, and positions a company for sustainable growth. The first quarter of the year is a great time to evaluate your corporate governance practices and perform any routine maintenance needed to keep that […]
What to Do After Being Served with a Lawsuit: Steps to Protect Your Legal Rights
Being served with a lawsuit is one of the most stressful legal events a business or individual can face. Whether the claim involves a contract dispute, an employment matter, an intellectual property issue, or another legal challenge, the actions you take in the first few days can significantly shape the outcome of your case. Acting […]
Will 2026 Be a Banner Year for SPACs? Understanding the Risks and Opportunities
Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs) continue to gain momentum as we move through 2026. After enduring a significant contraction following the 2021 boom and the regulatory scrutiny that followed, SPAC activity rebounded sharply in 2025 and now carries forward into 2026 with real momentum. The SPAC resurgence reflects broader improvements in both market conditions and the […]
Why Compliance Monitoring Matters for NY and NJ Businesses
Compliance programs are no longer judged by how they look on paper, but by how they function in the real world. Compliance monitoring is the ongoing process of reviewing, testing, and evaluating whether policies, procedures, and controls are being followed—and whether they are actually working. What Is Compliance Monitoring? In today’s heightened regulatory environment, compliance […]
When Are New Jersey Business Owners Personally Liable for Corporate Debt?
New Jersey personal guaranty liability is a critical issue for business owners who regularly sign contracts on behalf of their companies. A recent New Jersey Supreme Court decision provides valuable guidance on when a business owner can be held personally responsible for a company’s debt. Under the Court’s decision in Extech Building Materials, Inc. v. […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
