Antitrust & Competition Policy Blog

Editor: D. Daniel Sokol
University of Florida
Levin College of Law

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Should Setllements in Which the Patent Owners Pay the Accused Infringers to Stay Out the Market Be Illegal Per Se

Posted by D. Daniel Sokol

Tabrez Ahmad, College of Law Alliance University and Neha Mishra, Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology (KIIT University) - KIIT Law School ask Should Setllements in Which the Patent Owners Pay the Accused Infringers to Stay Out the Market Be Illegal Per Se.

ABSTRACT:

The entire topic revolves around the concept of reverse settlement payment in which a huge lump of money is paid by the company owning the patent to the generic company for not infringing its product and so that it could enjoy its 20 years for that patent. These provisions are enabled by Hatch-Waxman Act as to application by the patent owner to obtain a patent and it also deals with on what specific grounds a generic company can infringe the patent of the patent owner. The topic briefly narrows down about how reverse payment settlement is violating the antitrust laws and its related case laws. It also describes about how reverse settlement violated the competition law provisions.

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/antitrustprof_blog/2012/02/should-setllements-in-which-the-patent-owners-pay-the-accused-infringers-to-stay-out-the-market-be-i.html

| Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef0167616b3e49970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Should Setllements in Which the Patent Owners Pay the Accused Infringers to Stay Out the Market Be Illegal Per Se:

Comments

Post a comment