Pharmaceutical manufacturers have been accused of engaging in product hopping by introducing modified versions of branded drugs nearing patent expiry while simultaneously withdrawing the older drugs to hinder generic substitution.
Pharmaceutical manufacturers have been accused of engaging in product hopping by introducing modified versions of branded drugs nearing patent expiry while simultaneously withdrawing the older drugs to hinder generic substitution.
We assisted counsel in evaluating potential damages in a case where a branded pharmaceutical company was accused of harming competition by introducing new versions of a drug with longer remaining patent protection and withdrawing older versions of the drug.
Cornerstone Research estimated damages to three plaintiff groups—generic competitors, direct purchasers, and indirect purchasers. These plaintiffs accused the branded company of several anticompetitive acts involving its life-cycle management strategies. We analyzed various scenarios in order to estimate the damages corresponding to conduct that might ultimately be found to be anticompetitive.