Second Circuit follows precedent to hold that Cipro's "reverse payment" settlement was lawful | Practical Law

Second Circuit follows precedent to hold that Cipro's "reverse payment" settlement was lawful | Practical Law

On 29 April 2010, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (Second Circuit), following controlling case law, affirmed a district court ruling that a "reverse payment" settlement between Bayer AG (Bayer) and Barr Laboratories, Inc. (Barr) did not violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act. However, the Second Circuit added that "because of the "exceptional importance" of the antitrust implications of reverse exclusionary payment settlements of patent infringement suits, we invite plaintiffs-appellants to petition for rehearing en banc".

Second Circuit follows precedent to hold that Cipro's "reverse payment" settlement was lawful

by Practical Law
Law stated as at 29 Apr 2010 • USA (National/Federal)
On 29 April 2010, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (Second Circuit), following controlling case law, affirmed a district court ruling that a "reverse payment" settlement between Bayer AG (Bayer) and Barr Laboratories, Inc. (Barr) did not violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act. However, the Second Circuit added that "because of the "exceptional importance" of the antitrust implications of reverse exclusionary payment settlements of patent infringement suits, we invite plaintiffs-appellants to petition for rehearing en banc".