The California Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday in a case that could give the pharmaceutical industry more guidance on the legality of so-called “pay-for-delay” agreements.
A class of consumers alleges that Bayer Corp. illegally paid several generic drugmakers nearly $400 million to postpone plans to release generic versions of the antibiotic Cipro.
“With a payment that size, what they’re paying for is insulation from competition,” Lemley said, arguing Bayer had no other justification for the deal, not even avoiding litigation costs.
Justice Goodwin Liu’s questions suggested he might be leaning toward a “but-for” test that would ask whether a generic version of the drug would have entered the market earlier but for the settlement, The Recorder reported.
Full Content: The Recorder
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Federal Judge Rules Against AI Legal Tool in Copyright Dispute
Feb 11, 2025 by
CPI
Elon Musk Leads $97.4 Billion Bid to Take Control of OpenAI
Feb 10, 2025 by
CPI
Nigerian Court Confirms Consumer Protection Commission’s Authority Over Telecom Sector
Feb 10, 2025 by
CPI
Microsoft Under French Antitrust Investigation Over Bing Practices
Feb 10, 2025 by
CPI
Hausfeld Grows Antitrust Litigation Team
Feb 10, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – International Criminal Enforcement
Jan 23, 2025 by
CPI
The Antitrust Division’s Recent Work to Combat International Cartels
Jan 23, 2025 by
Emma Burnham & Benjamin Christenson
Information Sharing: The New Frontier of U.S. Antitrust Enforcement
Jan 23, 2025 by
Brian P. Quinn, Casey Kovarik & Michael Tubach
The Key Role of Guidelines on Exchanges of Information Among Competitors and the Divergent Transatlantic Paths
Jan 23, 2025 by
Rosa Abrantes-Metz & Albert Metz
Leniency, Whistleblowers, and Compliance
Jan 23, 2025 by
Richard Powers, Tara O’Malley & Cory Gordon