Abstract
This case note examines the legislation of the Hatch-Waxman Act, its purpose, and the mechanics that led to the resulting reverse payment settlements. Next it surveys the landscape of prior case law in the circuit courts, and focuses on the recent Third Circuit decision in In re K-Dur Antitrust Litigation that has rekindled the Hatch-Waxman debate. Then the note analyzes the policy concerns advanced by opposing sides of the argument and the economic fallout likely to result. Finally, it concludes with the assertion that the Supreme Court must intervene and establish the most beneficial standard of analysis for reverse payment settlements.
Recommended Citation
Jude Steinniger,
Shortsighted Response to Reverse Payments: How the Third Circuit May Cause Consumers to "Pay for the Delay" of New Drug Development,
58
Vill. L. Rev.
Tolle Lege 88
(2014).
Available at:
https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr/vol58/iss6/5