A manufacturer of a Schedule II product entered into sequential patent settlement agreements that included product supply obligations. Following allegations from its partners that the manufacturer was using the patent settlements to adversely affect competition, CRA’s analysis demonstrated that there was no anticompetitive effect and that the supply agreements enhanced efficiency and competition, particularly when considering the Drug Enforcement Agency’s quota system for active ingredient supply for Schedule II products.
Trends in competition in the United States: what does the evidence show?
Has the United States economy become less competitive in recent decades? One might think so based on a body of research that has rapidly become influential for...