Case Study: Patent Games: Plavix
Columbia Southern University
DBA 7035, Business, Government and Society
28 October 2013
Dr. William Reed
This case study will identify the conflicts between patent protection and preserving a competitive pharmaceutical market. Some pharmaceutical companies form monopolies and maximize their profit while shutting out the competitors. Patent holders are granted the right to produce, use, and sell the patented innovation for a certain time frame. As the inventor, having the exclusive rights encourages longevity of time and investment into new discoveries. “Patents are the driving force in the pharmaceutical industry, providing strong ...view middle of the document...
407). Bristol-Myers Squibb had hoped they could pursue a settlement with Apotex subjected to FTC approval, delay the launch of Apotex generic drug until their patent expired. This would ensure a continued monopoly for Bristol-Myers Squibb. Plavix was the major source of revenue for Bristol-Myers Squibb. Bristol-Myers Squibb had also reached a deferred-prosecution agreement in a case that involved charges of conspiracy to commit securities in an accounting scandal. I also believe this contributed to them wanting to settle.
Should Bristol-Myers Squibb and Sanofi-Aventis have attempted to pay Apotex to prevent it from launching a generic version of Plavix?
Bristol-Myers Squibb and Sanofi-Aventis should have attempted to pay Apotex to prevent them from launching the generic drug. Bristol-Myers Squibb seemed to only come to an agreement with Apotex because they were more concerned on how they would be affected if they decide against the agreement. Bristol-Meyers Squibb had other issues they were dealing with and felt like this would be the easiest action. The fact that Bristol-Meyers Squibb agreed to the $60 million break-up fee that they had something to hides. Apotex claims that the drug used to make Plavix and its generic version could have been inferred from a 1985 patent which had expired, which further raised questions about the validity or legitimacy of Bristol-Meyers Squibb Plavix patent (Baron, 2010).
Was Sherman’s strategy that of a shrewd business executive? Did Sherman act ethically in his strategy?
The strategy exerted by Sherman of Apotex was that of a shrewd business decision and he acted ethically in his strategy. Sherman was very knowledgeable about the patents and the dealings he wanted to have with Bristol-Myers Squibb. Sherman and Bristol-Myers amended their arrangement agreement, and Sherman ensured he negotiated the terms that would benefit Apotex. Before they shipped or launched the generic version of Plavix, Sherman spoke...