October Term 2012 · Docket 12-416
Do patent settlement payments violate antitrust law?
The FTC argues these payments harm consumers. Actavis claims they resolve patent disputes.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Stewart argued payments for non-competition violate antitrust law.
Justice Kennedy questioned if the test ignores patent strength.
Justice Ginsburg asked if the government changed its position.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 29-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 3-23 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 3-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 19-7 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 19-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 51-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 51-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 27-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 27-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-3 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 35-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 7-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 7-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 15-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 15-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 15-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 15-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 49-5 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 49-5
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests whether brand-name drug makers can pay generic rivals to delay market entry. The FTC says this practice suppresses competition. Actavis argues it settles valid patent disputes.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 19-7 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 19-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 35-1
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 25, 2013.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 35-1
What each side wants
The FTC wants the Court to strike down these payment agreements.
Actavis wants the Court to uphold the settlement as lawful.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 19-7 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 19-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 35-1
What each side says
The FTC argues payments for non-competition are antitrust violations.
Actavis argues the payments resolve genuine patent uncertainty.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 19-7 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 19-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 35-1
What the justices asked
Justice Scalia asked if Hatch-Waxman amendments caused this issue.
Justice Scalia questioned why payments differ from market division.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 29-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 3-23 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 3-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 51-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 51-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 27-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 27-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-3 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 7-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 7-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 15-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 15-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 15-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 15-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 49-5 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 49-5
Why it matters
This dispute affects drug prices and consumer access. It defines the limits of patent settlements. The outcome shapes future antitrust enforcement.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 19-7 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 19-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 35-1
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 29-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 3-23 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 3-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 51-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 51-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 27-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 27-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-3 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 35-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 7-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 7-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 15-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 15-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 15-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 15-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 49-5 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 49-5
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 19-7 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 19-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 35-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 19-7 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 19-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 40, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 40, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 35-1
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.