United Food & Commercial Workers Local 1776 v. Teikoku Pharma USA, Inc.

Good Law
74 F. Supp. 3d 1052·2014 WL 6465235·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161069
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 17, 2014Case No. 14-md-02521-WHOCalifornia20,249 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Orrick, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO DISMISS

Re: Dkt. No.

INTRODUCTION

In this multidistrict antitrust litigation, plaintiffs challenge in their consolidated complaints a settlement between Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. (“Endo”), a distributor of the brand-name drug Lidoderm, Tei-koku Seiyaku Co., its manufacturer, and Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Watson”) a generic drug manufacturer. Plaintiffs allege that when Endo and Teikoku agreed to drop their ongoing patent litigation against Watson, they offered consideration of $96 million in free product and deferred competition with Watson’s generic product worth $170 million in exchange for Watson’s agreement to delay introduction of its generic drug. As a result of this settlement, plaintiffs were allegedly unable to purchase the cheaper generic version of Lidoderm.

The central issue in defendants’ consolidated motion to dismiss is whether plaintiffs have plausibly pleaded that the settlement involved large and unjustified reverse payments that caused antitrust injury under the rule of reason analysis described in F.T.C. v. Actavis, Inc., - U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 2223 , 186 L.Ed.2d 343 - (2013). For pleading purposes,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.