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.
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 […]
Alumni-Student Happy Hour, February 19
Dear BCLR Alumni, I am pleased to announce that the Boston College Law Review will be hosting its Alumni-Student Happy […]
2014 E. Supp. Now Available
We have begun posting case comments from recent federal appellate decisions to our 2014 E. Supp., which can be found […]