Garwin Gerstein & Fisher LLP served as lead counsel on behalf of a class of direct purchasers. A $146 million settlement was reached in 2017. Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs asserted that Boehringer Ingelheim, Teva, Barr, and Duramed violated antitrust laws by engaging in an unlawful scheme to delay or block the market entry of less expensive, generic versions of the prescription drug Aggrenox (extended release aspirin-dipyridamole). The Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs allege that Boehringer entered into several unlawful, non-competition agreements, or horizontal market allocation agreements, with its prospective generic competitor, Barr,... Read More
Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit alleging that Pfizer and Ranbaxy violated federal antitrust laws by unlawfully impairing and delaying the introduction of generic versions of the prescription drug Lipitor into the United States market. Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs alleged that absent the unlawful conduct, Ranbaxy would have launched generic Lipitor earlier than November 30, 2011, the date on which Ranbaxy actually launched Lipitor. Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs allege that the prices for brand and generic Lipitor were higher than they would have been absent the challenged unlawful conduct.... Read More
On February 6, 2024, the court in In re: Seroquel XR (Extended Release Quetiapine Fumarate) Antitrust Litigation, No. 20-1076-CFC, certified a class of persons or entities who directly purchased 50mg, 150mg, 200mg, and/or 300mg strength of brand or generic Seroquel XR tablets between August 2, 2015 and April 30, 2017, and appointed Garwin Gerstein & Fisher LLP lead counsel for the class. Defendants are (a) AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals L.P., AstraZeneca L.P. (collectively, “AstraZeneca”), (b) Handa Pharmaceuticals, LLC (“Handa”), and (c) Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. (“Par”). Plaintiffs allege that Defendants violated the Sherman Act... Read More
Garwin Gerstein & Fisher LLP served as co-lead counsel for the direct purchaser class. The Firm achieved a $60.2 million cash settlement on behalf of the class after almost 16 years of complex, intense, and hard-fought litigation. The American Antitrust Institute recognized GGF for Outstanding Antitrust Litigation Achievement in Private Law Practice for its ground-breaking work on this case challenging a “reverse payment” agreement between brand-name and generic pharmaceutical companies to delay generic competition for the drug K-Dur 20. Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs commenced this litigation in 2001, alleging that... Read More
Garwin Gerstein & Fisher LLP served as sole lead counsel on behalf of class and direct purchasers through 2015, during which a $512 million partial settlement was reached. Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants violated federal antitrust laws by engaging in an unlawful scheme to delay or block the market entry of less expensive, generic versions of Provigil (modafinil). Plaintiffs alleged that the manufacturer of branded Provigil, Cephalon, entered into a series of unlawful, non-competition agreements, or horizontal market allocation agreements, with its prospective generic competitors, Defendants Teva, Barr, Mylan,... Read More
Garwin Gerstein & Fisher was appointed co-lead counsel of the Direct Purchaser Class. A $166 million settlement was achieved on behalf of the Class. The Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants violated federal antitrust laws by entering into an anticompetitive agreement that delayed or blocked the market entry of less expensive, generic versions of Lidoderm. Specifically, the Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs alleged that Endo and Teikoku agreed to pay Watson with brand Lidoderm patches and by agreeing not to start selling an authorized generic version of Lidoderm until 7.5... Read More
Garwin Gerstein & Fisher LLP serves as lead class counsel for the Direct Purchaser Class in In re Mushrooms Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litigation. Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants conspired to fix the price of fresh agaricus mushrooms sold in the non-Western United States (i.e. east of the Rocky Mountains) between February 4, 2001 and August 8, 2005 in violation of the federal antitrust laws. Among other things, Plaintiffs contend that the Defendants agreed to pricing policies and written price lists that established the price at which Defendants and their affiliated distributors... Read More
Garwin Gerstein & Fisher LLP served as co-lead counsel on behalf of a class of direct purchasers. A $750 million settlement was reached in 2019. Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs alleged that Forest Laboratories, LLC, Actavis plc, Forest Laboratories, Inc., and Forest Laboratories Holdings Ltd. (“Forest” or “Defendants”) violated federal antitrust laws by unlawfully delaying the introduction of generic versions of the prescription drug Namenda IR into the United States market, causing injury to direct purchaser plaintiffs and members of the class by depriving them of the opportunity to purchase lower-priced generic versions... Read More
Serving as co-lead counsel, Garwin Gerstein & Fisher LLP achieved a $190 million recovery for the Direct Purchaser Class. Direct purchasers claimed that Pfizer violated federal antitrust laws by illegally delaying the entry of generic versions of the prescription drug Neurontin. The active ingredient in Neurontin is gabapentin anhydrous. The lawsuit claimed that Pfizer delayed competition from less expensive generic versions of Neurontin by executing a multifaceted scheme involving, among other things, improperly listing certain patents with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. engaging in illegal promotion and sales of Neurontin... Read More
Garwin Gerstein & Fisher LLP was appointed co-lead counsel on behalf of the direct purchaser class in In re Nexium (Esomeprazole) Antitrust Litigation. Nexium was the first reverse payment case to proceed to trial after the Supreme Court’s decision in FTC v. Actavis, 570 U.S. 136 (2013). Plaintiffs settled with one defendant (Dr. Reddy’s) prior to trial, and settled with a second defendant (Teva) during the trial but before the jury verdict. Under the Dr. Reddy’s settlement, Dr. Reddy’s agreed to provide various forms of cooperation to plaintiffs during the trial involving... Read More
Garwin Gerstein & Fisher LLP was named lead class counsel on behalf of a class of direct purchasers of brand or generic Exforge tablets. Defendants are Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. and Novartis AG (collectively, “Novartis”). Plaintiffs allege that Defendants violated the Sherman Act when Novartis and its generic competitor, Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., entered into an anticompetitive reverse payment license agreement delaying generic competition for Exforge, thereby maintaining the price of Exforge at supra-competitive levels, and overcharging plaintiffs and members of the class. Plaintiffs are seeking overcharge damages incurred by the class caused... Read More
Garwin Gerstein & Fisher LLP was named co-lead class counsel on behalf of a class of direct purchasers of brand or generic Opana ER 5, 10, 20, 30, and/or 40 mg tablets. Defendants are (a) Endo Health Solutions Inc., Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc., and Penwest Pharmaceuticals Co. (collectively, “Endo”) and (b) Impax Laboratories, Inc. (“Impax”). Plaintiffs allege that Defendants violated the Sherman Act when Endo and its generic competitor, Impax, entered into an anticompetitive reverse payment settlement agreement delaying generic competition for Opana ER, thereby maintaining the price of Opana ER at... Read More
Garwin Gerstein & Fisher LLP served as co-lead counsel on behalf of a class of direct purchasers. A $98 million settlement was reached in 2015. Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs alleged that Astellas Pharma US, Inc. violated federal antitrust laws by unlawfully delaying the introduction of generic versions of the prescription drug Prograf into the United States market, causing injury to direct purchaser plaintiffs and members of the class by depriving them of the opportunity to purchase lower-priced generic versions of Prograf. The lawsuit claimed that, among other things, Astellas filed a baseless... Read More
Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs allege that Defendant violated federal antitrust laws by engaging in unlawful conduct to delay and impair competition by generic bioequivalent versions of Suboxone® tablets. Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs allege that Defendant engaged in an unlawful, multifaceted scheme to destroy demand for Suboxone® tablets and coerce patients, physicians, and managed care entities away from Suboxone® tablets and over to Reckitt’s new Suboxone® film product, in order to force Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs and members of the Class (defined below) to purchase branded Suboxone® film instead of generic... Read More