E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Contact the Docs

Docs on Twitter


About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.

Disclaimer

  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.

  • Law Blogs

Become a Fan

« Court Report | Main | FDA Seeks Comment on Biosimilar User Fee Proposal »

May 09, 2011

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451ca1469e2014e8856f59d970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Federal Trade Commission Issues Report on Reverse Settlement Agreements in FY2010:

Comments

How do I get a copy of these settlement agreements?

"The Report is accompanied by copies of settlements over Humira® (between Centocor and Abbott Labs), fentanyl (Cephalon and Watson), and gemcitabine (Eli Lilly & Co. against a number of foreign generic drug companies), among others."

Unfortunately, the actual agreements are confidential:


SEC. 1114. DISCLOSURE EXEMPTION.

Any information or documentary material filed with the Assistant Attorney General or the Commission pursuant to this subtitle shall be exempt from disclosure under section 552 of title 5, United States Code, and no such information or documentary material may be made public, except as may be relevant to any administrative or judicial action or proceeding. Nothing in this section is intended to prevent disclosure to either body of the Congress or to any duly authorized committee or subcommittee of the Congress.

Indeed, considering the FTC's staunch opposition, it seems almost inevitable that pay-for-delay patent litigation settlements will eventually go the way of the dinosaur -- the recent denial by the SCOTUS of cert for the Bayer case notwithstanding. Then again, I've been saying that for a while now, but pay-for-delay still has somehow survived.
http://www.industryweek.com/articles/patent_enforcement_21538.aspx?SectionID=2

The comments to this entry are closed.

November 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30