Asahi Glass Co., Ltd. v. Pentech Pharmaceuticals

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• applying the scope-of-the patent test; “there is no doubt that the patent may well be valid, so that Glaxo cannot be faulted for trying to enforce it.”
• “If any settlement agreement is thus to be classified as involving a forbidden ‘reverse payment’ we shall have no more patent settlements.”
• the competitor could use the provided product to undersell the brand manufacturer
• “The claim of fraud on the patent office fails for the reason just given: if patent 723 was obtained by fraud, it was a fraud aimed at competing manufacturers of drugs, not at the suppliers of those manufacturers, and so the fraud claim cannot be pressed as an antitrust claim.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).