Gregory Asciolla remarks on the Actos decision in the wake of SCOTUS’ ruling in Actavis
In an article touching on what Law360 is tracking to be some of the “biggest decisions in competition litigation” to date this year, partner Gregory Asciolla provided some commentary regarding the Actos antitrust litigation. The case, In re: Actos End-Payor Antitrust Litigation, alleged deception by diabetes drugmaker Takeda Pharmaceuticals Co., which produces Actos, to stifle generic competition for the drug.
The drug purchasers originally alleged that settlement agreements Takeda made with the generics companies were unlawful reverse payments, but they later abandoned their pay-for-delay claims, leaving only state law antitrust claims. The Actos decision is one of a handful of recent circuit court rulings that have further clarified the intersection of antitrust and intellectual property law in the wake of the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in 2013’s FTC v. Actavis.
“The law is still developing after Actavis, and novel issues continue to be addressed by lower courts,” said Asciolla. The Actos decision will “help guide other courts on the law,” he said, “particularly on the pleading requirements relating to the causal connection between the conduct and the alleged delay in marketing a generic.”