In re HIV Antitrust Litigation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 IN RE HIV ANTITRUST LITIGATION. Case No. 19-cv-02573-EMC

ORDER RE PASS-ON DEFENSE AND

DUPLICATIVE RECOVERY DEFENSE Docket Nos. 1727, 1729-2

12 13 In the Court’s order on in limine motions, it deferred ruling on several issues. Two issues that it deferred ruling on arose from Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine No. 6. The two issues are: (1) whether Defendants should be barred from introducing evidence that Plaintiffs “passed on” any overcharge to someone else; and (2) whether Defendants should be barred from arguing that there should not be duplicative direct purchaser and indirect purchaser recovery. The parties have filed supplemental briefs on these two issues. See Docket Nos. 1727, 1729-2. The Court notes that the only Plaintiffs who have a stake here are the indirect purchasers – i.e., the EPPs, the IHPPs, and United. The Court uses the term “Plaintiffs” in this order to refer to only the indirect purchasers. …