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.
CRA expands its Antitrust Practice with addition of M&A specialist and litigation expert
“I am pleased to welcome Hitesh back to CRA,” said Paul Maleh, President and Chief Executive Officer of Charles River Associates. “He specializes in antitrust...