Download this Paper Open PDF in Browser

The Need for Clarification on Product Hopping: Open Questions after Namenda and Doryx

Intellectual Property Committee, ABA Section of Antitrust Law, July 2017

15 Pages Posted: 17 Jul 2017  

Lindsey M. Edwards

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

Date Written: July 7, 2017

Abstract

Several tensions exist between the Second Circuit’s decision in Namenda and the Third Circuit’s decision in Doryx, leaving unanswered a number of questions about product hopping. This paper examines those tensions and potential consequences of failing to reconcile them. Part I defines product hopping and explains some of the ways it can be manifested. Part II provides an overview of the regulatory environment in which product hopping occurs. Part III summarizes the Namenda and Doryx opinions. Part IV examines the tensions between those opinions and discusses some of the open questions about product hopping left for the antitrust bar to decipher. Part V concludes.

Keywords: antitrust, product hopping, competition, Doryx, Namenda, Mylan

Suggested Citation

Edwards, Lindsey M., The Need for Clarification on Product Hopping: Open Questions after Namenda and Doryx (July 7, 2017). Intellectual Property Committee, ABA Section of Antitrust Law, July 2017. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2998740

Lindsey M. Edwards (Contact Author)

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati ( email )

650 Page Mill Rd
Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
60
Rank
305,615
Abstract Views
245