In re HIV Antitrust Litigation

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 14, 20223:19-cv-02573California5,835 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 STALEY, et al., Case No. 19-cv-02573-EMC

Plaintiffs,

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’

v. MOTION TO DISMISS, AND

DENYING BCBSA’S MOTION TO

GILEAD SCIENCES, INC., et al., STRIKE Defendants. Docket Nos. 860, 894

12 13 The End-Payor Plaintiffs (“EPPs”) have filed an antitrust class action against, inter alia, Gilead and Janssen. The EPPs’ operative complaint is located at Docket No. 788 (first amended consolidated class action complaint or “FAC”). Addendum B of the FAC reflects that one of the named EPPs is Blue Cross Blue Shield Association (“BCBSA”). Per the addendum, BCBSA is “a national association of 35 [now 34] independent and locally operated Blue Cross Blue Shield . . . companies” (also known as the “Local Blues”). FAC ¶ B1. However, BCBSA asserts claims in this litigation on its own behalf “as the carrier of the Service Benefit Plan, one of the Federal Employee Health Benefit Plans.” FAC ¶ B2. According to…

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.