The California Supreme Court Cements Vigorous Scrutiny of Reverse-Payment Settlements (Cipro)
Posted by Social Science Research Network
The California Supreme Court Cements Vigorous Scrutiny of Reverse-Payment Settlements (Cipro) Michael A. Carrier (Rutgers University)
Abstract: On May 7, 2015, in a case involving the antibiotic Cipro, the California Supreme Court overturned a lower court decision granting summary judgment for defendants. On behalf of all seven Justices, Justice Kathryn Werdegar wrote an opinion that supported the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in FTC v. Actavis and filled in some of the holes left open by the Court, cementing vigorous scrutiny of agreements by which brand-name drug companies pay generics to delay entering the market.
The California Supreme Court’s decision was important for two primary reasons. First, it supported Actavis, offering a structured Rule of Reason that infers anticompetitive harm from an unexplained payment for delay and limits the justifications defendants can offer.
Second, the Court supplemented Actavis. It filled in holes relating to burdens of proof and production. And it made clear that defendants bear the burden of production on evidence relating to litigation costs and payments for generic services. The Court also offered robust responses to defendants’ arguments that antitrust scrutiny would harm innovation, chill generic challenges, and reduce the frequency of settlement.
In offering the first appellate ruling since Actavis, and one that supported and buttressed the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling, the California Supreme Court’s decision in Cipro promises to be influential.
Featured News
Redfin Settles $9.2M Commission Inflation Lawsuits
May 7, 2024 by
CPI
DOJ Supports Colorado’s Efforts to Block Kroger-Albertsons Merger
May 7, 2024 by
CPI
Japan Considers Regulation of AI Developers
May 7, 2024 by
CPI
European Commission Extends Decision Deadline for Ita-Lufthansa Merger
May 7, 2024 by
CPI
UK, US and Australia Sanction Senior Leader of LockBit Cybercrime Gang
May 7, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Economics of Criminal Antitrust
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Navigating Economic Expert Work in Criminal Antitrust Litigation
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
The Increased Importance of Economics in Cartel Cases
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
A Law and Economics Analysis of the Antitrust Treatment of Physician Collective Price Agreements
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Information Exchange In Criminal Antitrust Cases: How Economic Testimony Can Tip The Scales
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI