A manufacturer of a Schedule II product entered into sequential patent settlement agreements that included product supply agreements. 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.
CRA named Top 3 Litigation Dispute Advisory Services Consultant in The National Law Journal
CRA’s Chicago Practice is proud to have been ranked as one of the Top 3 Litigation Dispute Advisory Services Consultancies in The National Law Journal’s “Best...