OBB Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to subscribe to the Orange Book Blog newsletter. If a new post is added during the day, you'll receive it by e-mail the next morning.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

AddThis Feed Button

Disclaimer

  • Orange Book Blog is published for informational purposes only; it contains no legal advice whatsoever. Publication of Orange Book Blog does not create an attorney-client relationship. Orange Book Blog is Aaron Barkoff's personal website and it is intended primarily for other attorneys. Orange Book Blog is not edited by McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP ("MBHB") or its clients. Therefore, no part of Orange Book Blog--whether information, commentary, or other--may be attributed to MBHB or its clients. Readers should be aware that MBHB represents many companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, and therefore Orange Book Blog may occasionally report on news that relates to MBHB clients. Orange Book Blog will always strive to be unbiased in its reporting. All information on Orange Book Blog should be double-checked for its accuracy and current applicability. -- © Aaron F. Barkoff 2006-08

« Ivax and Ranbaxy Successfully Appeal FDA's Delisting of Merck's Zocor Patents | Main | GSK May Be On The Hook for Antitrust Liability Stemming From Wellbutrin SR Patent Litigation »

May 19, 2006

DOJ Advises Supreme Court Not To Grant FTC's Cert Petition in FTC v. Schering

As Patently-O reported early this morning, the Solicitor General has filed an amicus brief in FTC v. Schering.  The Supreme Court, while considering whether to grant certiorari in the case, had asked for the views of the Solicitor General last fall.  The Solicitor General's brief advises the Court not to grant the FTC's cert petition.

If the Court denies certiorari, that would leave standing the 11th Circuit's decision that a settlement of a patent infringement lawsuit between Schering-Plough and Upsher-Smith did not violate the antitrust laws.  The patent infringement suit concerned Upsher's generic version of Schering's K-Dur 20 drug product, a treatment for high blood pressure and heart disease.  The settlement agreement between Schering and Upsher included a cash payment from Schering to Upsher in exchange for Upsher's promise not to launch its generic version of K-Dur 20 for six more years—close to the end of Schering's patent term.

The FTC's petition for certiorari presents the following questions for review:

  1. Whether the antitrust laws prohibit a brand name drug patent holder and a prospective generic competitor from settling patent infringement litigation by agreeing that the generic manufacturer will not enter the market before a future date within the term of the patent and that the patent holder will make a substantial payment to the generic manufacturer.
  2. Whether the court of appeals erred in concluding that "substantial evidence" did not support the Federal Trade Commission's factual finding that a payment from a patent holder to an allegedly infringing generic manufacturer was consideration for the generic manufacturer's delayed entry into the market rather than a separate royalty for a license concerning a different product.

The following briefs have been filed:

Thanks to Dennis Crouch for sending me copies of the briefs!

RELATED READING:

Comments

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the author has approved them.