Reversing the Trend? The Possibility that Rule Changes May Lead to Fewer Reverse Payments in Pharma Settlements
Anne Layne-Farrar, Nov 01, 2009
This article begins by laying out a simple framework that makes obvious the incentives at play in generic drug entry, brand challenges, and settlements between the two. Once this common understanding has been established, several rule changes that have taken place are summarized one in the form of an amendment to Hatch-Waxman and another in a recent decision by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. These institutional changes may have the consequence of reducing the prevalence of reverse payments. This possibility suggests a different policy tact might be called for, one that shifts emphasis from determining whether or not reverse payments should be per se illegal to working with the incentives that firms already face and exploiting those incentives to reduce firms inclinations to enter into anticompetitive reverse-payment settlements.
Featured News
Judge Pushes Elite College Financial Aid Antitrust Trial Toward Thanksgiving Finish
Jul 23, 2026 by
CPI
Altria, Juul Ask Appeals Court to Reverse Antitrust Class Certification
Jul 23, 2026 by
CPI
Japan Expands Antitrust Watchdog’s Role With New Bureau for Big Tech Oversight
Jul 23, 2026 by
CPI
DOJ Introduces Faster Merger Review Process With Targeted Antitrust Requests
Jul 23, 2026 by
CPI
EU Hits Google With $1 Billion Fine in First Digital Markets Act Penalty
Jul 23, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Antitrust Compliance
Jul 20, 2026 by
CPI
Your Antitrust Compliance Program: A Strong Voice in Your Defense
Jul 20, 2026 by
Joe Murphy
Antitrust Compliance for the AI Pricing Era
Jul 20, 2026 by
Alejandra Uria & Andre Geverola
Race to Report: Antitrust Leniency in the Whistleblower Era
Jul 20, 2026 by
Brian R. Faerstein & Nicole H. Sprinzen
Antitrust-By-Design: Competition Compliance in Digital Markets
Jul 20, 2026 by
Marcos Drummond Malvar, Gabriela Costa Carvalho Forsman & Luciana Mendes