In People of the State of New York v. Actavis, the New York Attorney General alleges that the pharmaceutical company has engaged in “product hopping,” or an anti-competition practice of altering a drug to delay the FDA approval of a generic alternative. The Second Circuit came down on the side of the Attorney General arguing that drug substitution laws are the only viable way generic manufacturers can compete. Yet, as FTC Commissioner Joshua D. Wright and D.C. Circuit Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg point out, antitrust laws were not necessarily intended to foster cooperation between market competitors. Instead, Wright and Ginsburg argue that a party must offer sufficient evidence to show that the new drug reformulation does not provide any sort of public health benefit before it can be deemed in violation of antitrust laws, and such evidence was lacking in Actavis. Aimed Alliance supports the protection the intellectual property rights of drug manufacturers in order to preserve the commercial viability of life-saving treatments and reformulations.
Last Updated on May 30, 2019 by Aimed Alliance
