AbstractThe Supreme Court’s decision in FTC v. Actavis is one of the most important antitrust decisions in the modern era. This symposium in the Rutgers University Law Review, which accompanied a live conference at the University of San Francisco Law School, consists of seven articles that provide guidance on Actavis.
This foreword introduces the articles, which (1) explain why courts have misconstrued Actavis (Davis & McEwan); (2) articulate the “Actavis inference” and show how it reveals errors in court opinions and scholarship (Edlin, Hemphill, Hovenkamp, & Shapiro); (3) offer a set of jury instructions that courts can use in reverse-payment cases (Sorenson & Shadowen); (4) explain why brand promises not to introduce their own generics constitute payment (Carrier); (5) show how state law can target reverse-payment settlements (Johnson); (6) explain why the Noerr-Pennington doctrine does not immunize reverse-payment settlements (Garcia); and (7) demonstrate how Actavis can apply beyond the pharmaceutical industry (Ghosh).
RightsCopyright for scholarly resources published in RUcore is retained by the copyright holder. By virtue of its appearance in this open access medium, you are free to use this resource, with proper attribution, in educational and other non-commercial settings. Other uses, such as reproduction or republication, may require the permission of the copyright holder.