Comments on: The FTC Takes On the DOJ in Schering-Plough http://truthonthemarket.com/2006/06/15/the-ftc-takes-on-the-doj-in-schering-plough/ Academic commentary on law, business, economics and more Sun, 12 Feb 2012 23:39:41 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Joshua Wright http://truthonthemarket.com/2006/06/15/the-ftc-takes-on-the-doj-in-schering-plough/#comment-5963 Sat, 17 Jun 2006 23:20:02 +0000 http://www.truthonthemarket.com/2006/06/15/the-ftc-takes-on-the-doj-in-schering-plough/#comment-5963 Thanks, David.

]]> By: David http://truthonthemarket.com/2006/06/15/the-ftc-takes-on-the-doj-in-schering-plough/#comment-5962 Sat, 17 Jun 2006 14:28:26 +0000 http://www.truthonthemarket.com/2006/06/15/the-ftc-takes-on-the-doj-in-schering-plough/#comment-5962 There was speculation on an ABA listserve this week that there was such an inter-agency conflict in Indiana Federation of Dentists and Superior Ct. Trial Lawyers. A quick google search led me to the first footnote of the FTC’s petition for cert in this case (available at http://patentlaw.typepad.com/patent/FTC_20Brief.pdf):

“The Commission has exercised its authority to represent itself before this Court only twice previously, in the 30 years that it has had that authority. See Pub. L. No. 93-637, § 204(a), 88 Stat. 2183, 2199-2200 (1975); FTC v. Indiana Federation of Dentists, 476 U.S. 447 (1986) (“IFD”); FTC v. Superior Ct. Trial Lawyers Ass’n, 493 U.S. 411 (1990). The Commission takes this step now not only to seek correction of a ruling that conflicts with fundamental antitrust and administrative law principles, but because of the great urgency of the matter, in light of the billions of dollars of consumer savings on prescription drugs that the ruling below jeopardizes.”

Although this is not percise enough to answer the question definitively, I would start any inquiry with these two cases.

]]>