Cornerstone Research assisted counsel in evaluating possible damages in a case where a branded pharmaceutical company was accused of delaying generic competition through various mechanisms.
Cornerstone Research assisted counsel in evaluating possible damages in a case where a branded pharmaceutical company was accused of delaying generic competition through various mechanisms, including managing the drug at issue’s life-cycle by switching patients to new versions that enjoyed longer remaining patent protection. Cornerstone Research estimated damages to three plaintiff groups—generic competitors, direct purchasers, and indirect purchasers—based on the differences between actual prices and quantities sold of branded and generic versions of the drug and the prices and quantities sold that would have resulted had the alleged anticompetitive acts not occurred.
Cornerstone Research estimated damages to three plaintiff groups—generic competitors, direct purchasers, and indirect purchasers.
Because the branded company was accused of several anticompetitive acts, including those involving its life-cycle management strategies, we analyzed various scenarios in order to estimate the damages corresponding to specific actions that might ultimately be found to be anticompetitive.