Mar. 25: Supreme Court Series – FTC v. Actavis, Post Argument Discussion


Mar 25, 2013 | Room 602
Event: 4:00 | Reception: 5:30
American University Washington College of Law
4801 Massachusetts Ave NW
Washington DC, 20016 (map)

In PIJIP’s ongoing Supreme Court series, counsel for parties and amici will discuss intellectual property cases on the afternoon of oral argument, addressing the reaction of the Court at oral argument.  In this case the Supreme Court examines reverse payment agreements, a type of settlement agreement where brand-name drug manufacturers pay potential generic competitors to agree not to sell competing generic drugs for a period of years.


  • Julia York, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, counsel for Respondent, Actavis, Inc.
  • Rohit Singla, Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, counsel for Respondent, Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
  • Ryan Christian, White & Case LLP, counsel for Respondent, Par Pharmaceutical Companies, Inc.
  • Krista CoxKnowledge Ecology International, counsel for amicus Knowledge Ecology International, supporting Petitioner
  • Scott Hemphill, Columbia Law School

Moderated by Michael Carroll, Washington College of Law


Decision: June 17, 2013
Argument: Transcript; Audio


Whether reverse-payment agreements are per se lawful unless the underlying patent litigation was a sham or the patent was obtained by fraud (as the court below held), or instead are presumptively anticompetitive and unlawful (as the Third Circuit has held).


Brief for Petitioner FTC
Brief for Respondent Par Pharmaceutical
Brief for Respondent Actavis
Brief for Respondent Solvay Pharmaceuticals

Amicus Briefs

Knowledge Ecology International Amicus Brief
Public Patent Foundation Amicus Brief
Louisiana Wholesale Purchasers Amicus Brief
America’s Health Insurance Plans Amicus Brief
New York, et al. Amicus Brief
118 Law, Economics, and Business Professors Amicus Brief
Apotex Amicus Brief
AARP Amicus Brief
Representative Henry A. Waxman Amicus Brief
National Association of Chain Drug Stores Amicus Brief
National Association of Manufacturers Amicus Brief
Generic Manufacturers Amicus Brief
Enavail Amicus Brief
Generic Pharmaceutical Association Amicus Brief
Bayer Amicus Brief
Shire PLC Amicus Brief
NYIPLA Amicus Brief
Merck Amicus Brief
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America Amicus Brief
Antitrust Economists Amicus Brief
Law Professors Gregory Dolin, Kent Bernard, et al. Amicus Brief
AIPLA Amicus Brief
Mediation and Negotiation Professionals Amicus Brief
David Opderbeck and Erik Lillquist Amicus Brief
Health, Economics, and Law Professors Amicus Brief
Washington Legal Foundation Amicus Brief
Intellectual Property Owners Association Amicus Brief

SCOTUSblog Entry: FTC v. Actavis

  One Response to “Mar. 25: Supreme Court Series – FTC v. Actavis, Post Argument Discussion”

  1. If I were there I would want to know how psychiatrists are not drug dealers for people prone to addiction.