The purpose of this restriction was to keep the drug chemical out of the hands of small companies that might act as price-cutters, and the effect was to maintain stable, uniform prices.

The district court granted summary judgment against the defendants on the antitrust charges, but dismissed the invalidity claims on the ground that the Government lacked standing to challenge patent validity.

The district court also denied the Government’s request for mandatory selling of the bulk chemical and compulsory licensing, on reasonable terms.

The Court noted that mandatory sales and reasonable royalty compulsory licensing were "well established forms of relief when necessary to an effective remedy, particularly where patents have provided the leverage for or have contributed to the antitrust violation adjudicated."

[7] After the Supreme Court's decision, the government found itself possessed of a new power to challenge antitrust defendants' patents.

Text of United States v. Glaxo Group Ltd., 410 U.S. 52 (1973) is available from: Findlaw Justia Library of Congress Oyez (oral argument audio)