Abstract: On July 16, 2012, in In re K-Dur Antitrust Litigation, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that, when challenged as an antitrust violation, a reverse payment settlement constitutes prima facie evidence of an unreasonable restraint of trade. The “quick look rule of reason” analysis articulated by the court represents a well-intentioned divergence from the Second, Eleventh, and Federal Circuits’ “scope of the patent” test. It does not, however, fully consider the parties’ motivations and the possible public benefit from these settlements. This Comment argues that the court’s introduction of an overly restrictive standard introduces uncertainty that may avert the Hatch-Waxman Act’s goal of speeding public access to more affordable drugs.
Volume LVI Board of Editors Announced
We are pleased to announce the Board of Editors for the 2014-2015 academic year: Volume 56 Board of Editors […]
BCLR Releases Vol. LV No. 2
The Boston College Law Review is pleased to publish the March 2014 issue. Here are summaries of this issue’s Articles and […]
BCLR Moves to # 25 in Law Journal Rankings
The Boston College Law Review has moved from #26 to #25 in the annual Washington and Lee University School of Law Law […]