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.
2015-2016 Board of Editors
We are pleased to announce the Board of Editors for the 2015-2015 academic year.
BCLR Latest Issue: Vol. LVI No. 3
The Boston College Law Review is pleased to announce our latest publication , the May 2015 issue. The current issue is featured on […]
BCLR Releases Vol. LV No. 3
The Boston College Law Review is pleased to publish the May 2014 issue. Here are summaries of this issue’s Articles and Notes: […]