As the US Supreme Court readies to officially rule on the so-called pay-for-delay schemes used by brand name drug companies to keep the often cheaper generic forms off the shelves, analysts are reportedly expecting ongoing complexities to emerge from the ruling. Further, the ruling will likely lead to more litigation to contest the deals by both the Federal Trade Commission and private parties. The Federal Trade Commission maintains that the pay-for-delay deals violate antitrust law and prevent consumers from having access to less expensive medications. Analysts are torn as to which way the Court is likely to rule.
Full Content: Thomson Reuters
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Spain’s BBVA Remains Optimistic About Hostile Takeover of Sabadell
Mar 18, 2025 by
CPI
BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street Seek Dismissal of Texas Antitrust Lawsuit
Mar 18, 2025 by
CPI
EU to Boost Metal Sectors with Energy Relief and Safeguards
Mar 18, 2025 by
CPI
Players’ Association Sues Tennis Governing Bodies Over Alleged Antitrust Violations
Mar 18, 2025 by
CPI
Turkey Moves to Curb Big Tech’s Power with New Regulatory Bill
Mar 18, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Self-Preferencing
Feb 26, 2025 by
CPI
Platform Self-Preferencing: Focusing the Policy Debate
Feb 26, 2025 by
Michael Katz
Weaponized Opacity: Self-Preferencing in Digital Audience Measurement
Feb 26, 2025 by
Thomas Hoppner & Philipp Westerhoff
Self-Preferencing: An Economic Literature-Based Assessment Advocating a Case-By-Case Approach and Compliance Requirements
Feb 26, 2025 by
Patrice Bougette & Frederic Marty
Self-Preferencing in Adjacent Markets
Feb 26, 2025 by
Muxin Li