UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTT EASTERN DISTRICT OF …€¦ · ORATORIE NC., MYLA LS INC., PA L, INC., PA L COMPAN EUTICALS dants. iff UFCW L ngs this cla obtain injun ted have sus

UFCW Lof itself a v DR. REDLABORAPHARMPHARMPHARMZYDUS

1

similarly

recover d

others sim

manufact

extended

product i

2

manufact

generic d

3

Plaintiff’

LOCAL 1500and all other

Plaint

.

DDY’S LABATORIES, IACEUTICAACEUTICAACEUTICAPHARMAC

Defen

Plaint.

y situated, bri

damages and

milarly situa

turers in the

d-release tabl

in the United

Plaint.

turers, includ

drugs, includ

Plaint.

s own acts a

UNITEASTER

0 WELFARrs similarly s

tiff,

BORATORIEINC., MYLAALS INC., PAAL, INC., PAAL COMPANCEUTICALS

ndants.

tiff UFCW L

ings this cla

d obtain injun

ated have sus

world, arisin

lets (“divalp

d States.

tiff’s claims

ding Defend

ding divalpro

tiff’s allegati

and upon inf

TED STATERN DISTRI

RE FUND, onsituated,

ES, INC., IMAN INC., MAR

AR NIES, INC.,S (USA) INC

Local 1500 W

ss action for

nctive and e

stained again

ng from thei

roex ER”), a

arise from a

dants here, to

oex ER, whic

ions are mad

formation an

ES DISTRIICT OF PE

n behalf

MPAX YLAN

, and C.,

Welfare Fund

r claims unde

quitable reli

nst Defendan

ir conspiracy

and to alloca

a broad-based

o raise and fi

ch is at issue

de on person

nd belief as to

ICT COURTENNSYLVA

No. _____ CLASS A JURY TR

d, on behalf

er federal an

ief for the su

nts, the large

y to raise the

ate markets a

d conspiracy

ix the prices

e in this Com

nal knowledg

o all other m

T ANIA

___

ACTION CO

RIAL DEMA

of itself and

nd state antit

ubstantial inj

est generic d

e prices of di

and custome

y by numero

of more tha

mplaint.

ge as to Plain

matters.

OMPLAINT

ANDED

d all others

trust laws to

uries it and

drug

ivalproex so

ers for this

ous generic d

an a dozen

ntiff and

odium

drug

Case 2:16-cv-06058-GEKP Document 1 Filed 11/17/16 Page 1 of 51

4

treatment

essential

5

which div

6

of that tim

priced at

results in

prices.

7

increases

the price

Office (“

between

8

were the

well as a

largest ge

Mylan In

Compani

1 See

Extraordin

Divalp.

t of migraine

medicine by

Signif.

valproex ER

Gener.

me, has been

less than a d

n vigorous pr

Recen.

s. Between th

of divalproe

“GAO”) note

2010 and 20

These.

result of De

llocate custo

eneric drug m

nc.; Mylan P

ies, Inc.; and

GAO, Generic

nary Price Incr

proex ER is

es and seizur

y the World

ficantly, diva

R is derived,

ric versions o

n priced sign

dollar per tab

rice competi

ntly, howeve

he fourth qu

ex ER has in

ed that divalp

015.1

e price hikes

efendants’ co

omers and m

manufacture

harmaceutic

d Zydus Phar

c Drugs Underreases, No. 16-

NATURE O

a commonly

res, and its b

Health Orga

alproex ER i

valproate, h

of divalproe

nificantly low

blet. This is

ition, benefit

er, generic di

uarter of 2013

ncreased ove

proex ER ha

were not the

onspiracy to

markets for, d

ers: Dr. Redd

cals Inc.; Par

rmaceuticals

r Medicare: Pa-706, App’x III

- 2 -

OF THE AC

y prescribed

base compou

anization.

is not new co

has been kno

x ER has be

wer than its b

because the

ting consume

ivalproex ER

3 and the be

er 500%. The

ad experienc

e result of co

fix, raise, m

divalproex E

dy’s Laborat

r Pharmaceu

s (USA) Inc.

art D Generic DI (Aug. 2016),

CTION

d anticonvuls

und, valproa

ompound. T

wn since the

een on the m

branded cou

presence of

ers and third

R has experi

ginning of th

e U.S. Gover

ced “extraord

ompetitive m

maintain, and

ER. Defendan

tories, Inc.; I

utical, Inc.; P

.

Drug Prices Dhttp://www.ga

sant indicate

ate, has been

The essential

e late 19th ce

market for yea

unterpart—in

f generic dru

d-party payo

enced unpre

he second qu

rnment Acco

dinary price

market force

d stabilize the

nts are amon

Impax Labor

Par Pharmace

Declined Overaao.gov/assets/6

d for the

designated

ingredient f

entury.

ars and, for m

n many insta

ugs usually

ors through lo

ecedented pri

uarter of 201

ountability

increases”

s; instead, th

e prices of, a

ng the world

ratories, Inc

eutical

ll, but Some H680/679022.pdf

an

from

most

ances

ower

ice

14,

hey

as

d’s

.;

Had f .


9

meetings

Generic P

low num

Defendan

supracom

1

enforcers

Antitrust

leading a

antitrust

in a broa

dozen ge

arise from

investiga

prices.

1

issuing su

pricing o

DOJ’s an

documen

Defen.

s, both in priv

Pharmaceuti

bers of comp

nts’ anticom

mpetitive pric

Defen0.

s, members o

t Division (“

a multi-state

probes into a

d-based con

eneric drugs,

m a federal g

ating whethe

DOJ’s1.

ubpoenas to

of generic dig

nd CTAG’s s

nts and testim

ndants orche

vate and at p

ical Associat

petitors and

mpetitive acti

cing to the p

ndants’ price

of Congress,

DOJ”) and t

working gro

allegations t

spiracy to fi

including d

grand jury pr

r Defendant

s and CTAG

Lannett and

goxin tablets

subpoenas to

mony concer

strated their

public events

tion (“GPhA

barriers to e

ons and hav

present.

e increases ha

, the press, a

the Connecti

oup of state a

that as many

x, raise, mai

divalproex ER

roceeding in

s and other d

G’s investigat

d Impax conc

s—a commo

o Impax and

rning the pric

- 3 -

conspiracy

s, such as tra

A”), among o

entry in the m

e allowed th

ave also grab

and drug purc

icut Attorney

attorneys ge

y as a dozen g

intain, and st

R. Significan

n the Eastern

drug manufa

tions started

cerning their

only prescrib

d Lannett, DO

cing of digox

through secr

ade associati

others. Oligo

market for di

hem to sustai

bbed the atte

chasers. The

y General’s

neral—are c

generic drug

tabilize the p

ntly, DOJ ha

n District of P

acturers cons

d in summer

r contacts w

bed heart me

OJ also subp

xin.

ret communi

ion meetings

opolistic con

ivalproex—f

in their unlaw

ention of gov

e Departmen

Office (“CT

conducting s

g manufactur

prices of as m

as issued sub

Pennsylvani

spired to fix

2014, with e

with competit

edication. Fo

poenaed Par,

ications and

s held by the

nditions—e.g

facilitated

wful

vernment

nt of Justice’

TAG”)—whi

sweeping

rers particip

many as two

bpoenas whi

a that is

generic drug

each agency

tors, sales, an

ollowing the

, seeking

d

e

g.,

s

ich is

ated

o-

ich

g

y

nd


1

doxycycl

subpoena

1

subpoena

two senio

seeking,

generic p

competit

14

DOJ subp

and verap

represent

requirem

1

against m

analyst h

2 Taro

SECText&wJkRTRV

3 Mylhttp://apps2LQZGT&

By lat2.

line such as

as.

In Au3.

as from the D

or officers in

among other

pharmaceutic

or contacts a

And m4.

poena conce

pamil—and

ts a significa

ment.

The D5.

many generic

has estimated

o, SEC Form 6

&TEXT=aHR0cVE9MCZTRVE

lan SEC Form .shareholder.co

&docid=116784

te 2014, DO

Actavis, Lan

gust 2016, T

DOJ. In Sept

n its commer

r things, “co

cal products

and pricing o

most recently

erning four a

that search w

ant escalation

DOJ’s investi

c drug manu

d, for examp

6-K (Sept. 9, 20cDovL2FwaS5

E9MCZTUURF

10-Q, at 58 (Nom/sec/viewer486#MYL10Q

J’s probe ex

nnett, Mayne

Teva and Dr.

tember 2016

rcial team, re

ommunicatio

.”2 Zydus is

of divalproex

y, on Novem

additional dru

warrants had

n of the DOJ

igation could

facturers, in

le, that Teva

016), http://phx50ZW5rd2l6YXFU0M9U0VDV

Nov. 10, 2016),Content.aspx?c

Q_20160930XD

- 4 -

xpanded furth

e Pharma, M

. Reddy’s als

6, Taro Pharm

eceived gran

ons with com

also under f

x ER.

mber 10, 201

ugs—cidofo

d been execu

J’s investiga

d also result

cluding thos

a could face

x.corporate-ir.nXJkLmNvbS9mVElPTl9FTlRJ

, companyid=AB

DOC_HTM_S5

her to includ

Mylan, and P

so disclosed

maceuticals,

nd jury subpo

mpetitors and

federal inves

6, Mylan dis

ovir, clipizid

uted.3 The is

ation given th

t in the impo

se named as

liability of b

net/phoenix.zhmaWxpbmcueJUkUmc3Vic2

BEA-582E80BDD42

de manufactu

ar, which all

d that they re

, disclosed th

oenas from t

d others rega

stigation con

sclosed that

de-metformin

suance of w

he probable

osition of sub

Defendants

between $30

html?c=114698eG1sP2lwYWd2lkPTU3.

215D11A4040

urers of

l received si

eceived

hat it, “as we

the [DOJ],”

arding the sa

ncerning its

it had receiv

n, propranolo

warrants

cause

bstantial fine

here. One

00 million an

8&p=irol-dlPTExMTM0

0D12D4C2E29

imilar

ell as

ale of

ved a

ol

es

nd

MjU

97.


$700 mil

Another

1

requested

Sun, Tev

doxycycl

informati

drugs tha

albuterol

hydrochl

1

of the pro

that, after

drug man

2016.5

1

of divalp

prices for

4 Eric

(Nov. 10, 2liabilities-a

5 See BloombergCollusion Creport-of-p(Nov. 3, 20

llion, while M

analyst estim

In add6.

d informatio

va, West-Wa

line, and dig

ion from De

at have simil

l sulfate, glyc

lorothiazide.

Signif7.

osecution ph

r two years o

nufacturers,

As a r8.

proex ER, co

r these gener

c Saonowsky, D2016), http://wanalyst-says.

David McLaug (Nov. 3, 2016Charges, Wall

possible-probe-016), http://reu

Mylan could

mated that fin

dition to DO

n from gene

ard, and Zydu

goxin, among

fendants and

larly undergo

copyrrolate,

ficantly, rece

hase: Bloomb

of investigat

with sources

result of Def

nsumers and

ric drugs.

DOJ’s price-fix

www.fiercephar

ghlin & Caroli6), http://bloom St. J. (Nov. 3,-1478209036; Dut.rs/2fIIPn0.

d face liabilit

nes industry

J’s and CTA

eric manufac

us, concernin

g numerous o

d other gene

one significa

neostigmine

ent news rep

berg, The Wa

tion, DOJ is

s stating that

fendants’ sch

d third-party

xing investigatrma.com/pharm

ine Chen, U.S. m.bg/2fIr5rX; P, 2016), http://wDeena Beasley

- 5 -

ty of betwee

y-wide could

AG’s investig

cturers Actav

ng their sale

other drugs.

ric drug man

ant price incr

e methylsulf

ports have sta

Wall Street Jo

close to brin

t the charges

heme to fix,

y payors paid

tion could leadma/doj-s-price-

Charges in GePeter Loftus, etwww.wsj.com/y, Drug makers

en $380 milli

d exceed $1 b

gations, mem

vis, Apotex,

es of divalpro

Members o

nufacturers r

reases over t

fate, and ben

ated that inv

ournal, and R

nging crimin

s could be br

raise, mainta

d, and contin

d to sizable liab-fixing-investig

eneric-Drug Prt al., Generic-D/articles/generis under fire for

ion and $770

billion.4

mbers of Con

Impax, Lann

oex ER, prav

f Congress a

regarding oth

the past few

nazepril/

vestigations a

Reuters have

nal charges a

rought as ear

ain, and stab

nue to pay, su

bilities, analystgation-could-le

robe to Be FileDrug Firms Faic-drug-makersr possible price

0 million.

ngress have

nett, Mylan,

vastatin,

also requeste

her generic

w years, inclu

are on the cu

e all reported

against gener

rly as the en

bilize the pri

upracompeti

t says, FiercePhead-to-sizable-

e by Year-End,ace Possible s-shares-drop-oe fixing, Reuter

Par,

ed

uding

usp

d

ric

nd of

ices

itive

harma

,

on-rs


1

compose

purchase

ER, other

insureds,

including

“Class Pe

2

entities w

Maine, M

Carolina,

Virginia,

reimburs

consump

beneficia

anticomp

2

obtain inj

injuries t

violation

2

§§ 1331

Plain9.

d of all indiv

d, paid, and

r than for re

, participants

g the date tha

eriod”).

The se0.

who, in Alab

Michigan, M

, North Dako

, Wisconsin,

ement for so

ption by itsel

aries, from at

petitive effec

Plaint1.

junctive reli

hat Plaintiff

n of Section 1

This C2.

and 1337 an

tiff seeks to

viduals and e

provided re

sale, for con

s, or benefici

at the antico

econd class (

ama, Arizon

innesota, Mi

ota, Oregon,

and the Dis

ome or all of

lf, its familie

t least as ear

cts of Defend

J

tiff brings th

ief and costs

f and the othe

1 of the Sher

Court has sub

nd Section 16

certify two

entities in th

imbursemen

nsumption by

iaries, from

mpetitive ef

(the “Damag

na, Californi

ississippi, N

, Rhode Islan

strict of Colu

f the purchas

es, or its mem

rly as Octobe

dants’ unlaw

JURISDICT

is action und

of suit, inclu

er members

rman Act, 15

bject matter

6 of the Clay

- 6 -

classes. The

he United Sta

nt for some o

y itself, its fa

at least as ea

ffects of Def

ges Class”) i

a, Florida, H

Nebraska, Ne

nd, South Da

umbia, indire

se price for d

mbers, emplo

er 1, 2013 th

wful conduct

TION AND

der Section 1

uding attorn

of the Class

5 U.S.C. § 1

jurisdiction

yton Act, 15

e first class (t

ates or its ter

or all of the p

amilies, or it

arly as Octob

fendants’ unl

is composed

Hawaii, Iowa

evada, New M

akota, Tenne

ectly purcha

divalproex E

oyees, insure

hrough and in

ceased.

VENUE

16 of the Cla

neys’ fees, ag

s have suffer

.

over this ac

U.S.C. § 26

the “Injuncti

rritories who

purchase pri

ts members,

ber 1, 2013 t

lawful condu

d of all indivi

a, Kansas, M

Mexico, New

essee, Utah,

sed, paid, an

ER, other tha

eds, particip

ncluding the

ayton Act, 1

gainst Defen

red from Def

ction pursuan

6, because th

ive Class”) i

o indirectly

ce for divalp

employees,

through and

uct ceased (t

iduals and

Massachusett

w York, Nor

Vermont, W

nd provided

an for resale,

pants, or

e date that th

5 U.S.C. §26

ndants for the

fendants’

nt to 28 U.S.

his action ari

is

proex

d

the

s,

rth

West

, for

he

6, to

e

.C.

ses


under the

claims pu

2

because t

proposed

a state di

24

Section 1

were fou

commerc

2

intended

including

2

flow of in

substanti

2

interstate

A

2

benefits f

11590. L

whom liv

e federal anti

ursuant to 28

This C3.

this action is

d class excee

ifferent from

Venue4.

12 of the Cla

nd, or had ag

ce discussed

Defen5.

to, and did h

g in this Dist

Defen6.

nterstate com

ial, and reaso

Each D7.

e commerce

A. Plaint

Plaint8.

fund with its

Local 1500 pr

ve in New Y

itrust laws. T

8 U.S.C. § 13

Court also ha

s a class acti

eds $5,000,00

m that of one

e is proper in

ayton Act, 15

gents within

below was c

ndants’ cond

have a subst

trict.

ndants sold a

mmerce. The

onably fores

Defendant, o

to join or eff

tiff

tiff UFCW L

s principal pl

rovides near

York, among

This Court a

367(a).

as jurisdictio

on in which

00 and at lea

of Defendan

n this Distric

5 U.S.C. § 2

n this District

carried out i

duct, as descr

tantial effect

and shipped d

e conspiracy

eeable effec

or one or mo

ffectuate thei

THE

Local 1500 W

lace of busin

rly 23,000 m

other states.

- 7 -

also has supp

on over this m

the aggrega

ast one mem

nts.

ct under 28 U

2, because D

t, and a port

n this Distric

ribed in this

on, the inter

divalproex E

y in which D

t on interstat

ore of its affi

ir conspiracy

E PARTIES

Welfare Fund

ness at 425 M

members with

. During the

plemental jur

matter under

ate amount in

mber of the D

U.S.C. § 139

Defendants r

tion of the af

ct.

Complaint,

rstate comm

ER in a conti

efendants pa

te and intras

iliates, used

y.

S

d (“Local 15

Merrick Ave

h health and

Class Period

risdiction ov

r 28 U.S.C.

n controvers

Damages Cla

91(b), (c), an

resided, trans

ffected inters

was within t

merce of the U

inuous and u

articipated h

state comme

the instrume

500”) is an e

enue, Westbu

welfare ben

d, Local 150

ver state law

§ 1332(d)

sy for the

ass is a citize

nd (d) and

sacted busin

state trade an

the flow of,

United State

uninterrupted

had a direct,

rce.

entalities of

employee we

ury, New Yo

nefits, many

00 purchased

en of

ness,

nd

was

es,

d

elfare

ork,

of

d and


paid for s

and prop

Defendan

markets a

B

2

its princi

Reddy’s

place of b

5000034

Period, D

3

principal

technolog

manufact

Pharmac

3

business

3

principal

some or all t

erty. Local 1

nts’ anticom

and custome

B. Defen

1.

Defen9.

pal place of

is a subsidia

business loc

. Dr. Reddy’

Dr. Reddy’s

2.

Defen0.

l place of bus

gy-based spe

tured and so

euticals divi

3.

Defen1.

at 1000 Myl

Defen2.

l place of bus

the purchase

1500 paid an

mpetitive con

ers.

ndants

Dr. Reddy

ndant Dr. Re

business at

ary of Dr. Re

ated at 8-2-3

’s manufactu

sold generic

Impax

ndant Impax

siness at 308

ecialty pharm

ld generic d

ision.

Mylan De

ndant Mylan

lan Blvd., C

ndant Mylan

siness at 781

e price of div

nd reimburse

duct to fix, r

y’s

eddy’s Labo

107 College

eddy’s Labor

337, Road N

ures, market

c divalproex

Laboratorie

831 Huntwo

maceutical c

ivalproex ER

efendants

Inc. is a Pen

anonsburg, P

Pharmaceut

1 Chestnut R

- 8 -

valproex ER,

ed more for t

raise, mainta

ratories, Inc

e Road East,

ratories Ltd.

No. 3, Banjar

s, and sells v

ER in the U

es, Inc. (“Imp

od Avenue,

company. Du

R in the Unit

nnsylvania c

Pennsylvani

ticals Inc. is

Ridge Road,

, thereby suf

these produc

ain, and stab

c. (“Dr. Redd

Princeton, N

., an Indian c

ra Hills, Hyd

various gene

United States

pax”) is a D

Hayward, C

uring the Cla

ted States th

corporation w

ia, 15317.

a West Virg

Morgantown

ffering injury

cts than it wo

ilize the pric

dy’s”) is a c

New Jersey,

company wi

derabad Tela

eric drugs. D

.

Delaware cor

California, 94

ass Period, Im

hrough its Gl

with its princ

ginia corpora

n, West Virg

y to its busin

ould have ab

ces and alloc

corporation w

08540. Dr.

ith its princip

angana, India

During the Cl

rporation wit

4544. Impax

mpax

lobal

cipal place o

ation with it

ginia 26505.

ness

bsent

cate

with

pal

a,

lass

th its

x is a

of

s

.


3

to as “My

products

United S

34

place of b

3

principal

3

collective

products

billion. T

divalproe

3

corporati

08534. Z

company

During th

States.

3

collective

Defen3.

ylan.” Myla

in the Unite

tates.

4.

Defen4.

business at O

Defen5.

l place of bus

Defen6.

ely referred

in the Unite

The merger w

ex ER in the

5.

Defen7.

ion with its p

Zydus is a sub

y. Zydus man

he Class Per

Defen8.

ely as “Defe

ndants Mylan

an manufactu

ed States. Du

Par Defen

ndant Par Ph

One Ram Ri

ndant Par Ph

siness at On

ndants Par Ph

to as “Par.”

ed States. In

was complete

United Stat

Zydus

ndant Zydus

principal pla

bsidiary of Z

nufactures, m

riod, Zydus m

ndants Dr. Re

endants.”

n Inc. and M

ures, market

uring the Cla

ndants

armaceutica

dge Road, C

armaceutica

e Ram Ridg

harmaceutic

” Par manufa

May 2015, E

ed in Septem

tes.

Pharmaceut

ace of busine

Zydus Pharm

markets, and

manufacture

***

eddy’s, Impa

- 9 -

Mylan Pharm

s, and sells b

ass Period, M

al, Inc. is a D

Chestnut Rid

al Companies

e Road, Che

al, Inc. and P

actures, mark

Endo announ

mber 2015. D

ticals (USA)

ess at 73 Rou

maceuticals L

d sells variou

d and sold g

**********

ax, Mylan, P

maceuticals In

branded and

Mylan sold g

Delaware cor

dge, New Yo

s, Inc. is a D

estnut Ridge

Par Pharmac

kets, and sel

nced that it w

During the C

) Inc. (“Zydu

ute 31 N, Pen

Limited, an I

us generic ph

generic dival

Par, and Zyd

nc. are collec

d generic pha

generic dival

rporation wit

ork, 10977.

Delaware cor

, New York

ceutical Com

ls generic ph

was acquirin

Class Period,

us”) is a New

nnington, N

Indian pharm

harmaceutica

lproex ER in

dus are referr

ctively refer

armaceutical

lproex ER in

th its princip

rporation wit

, 10977.

mpanies, Inc

harmaceutic

ng Par for $8

Par sold gen

w Jersey

ew Jersey,

maceutical

al products.

n the United

red to

rred

l

n the

pal

th its

. are

al

8.05

neric


3

participat

statemen

4

sold by a

sold by o

quickly g

4

typically

prescript

have incr

86% of a

6 IMS

of medicinhttp://www

Variou9.

ted as co-con

nts that aided

GENE

When0.

an independe

or pursuant to

gain substant

Empir1.

will have ob

ions with a g

reased the sh

all drugs disp

S Institute for Hnes in the Unitew.plannedparen

us other enti

nspirators in

d and abetted

ERIC DRUGTO PATI

n generic ver

ent generic m

o an agreem

tial market s

rical studies

btained abou

generic. Inde

hare of total

pensed in the

Healthcare Infoed States in 201nthoodadvocate

ities and ind

n the acts com

d and were in

GS REDUCIENTS AND

rsions of a br

manufacturer

ment with the

share.

have shown

ut 90% of the

eed, accordin

prescription

e United Stat

ormatics, Medi13 (Apr. 2014)e.org/2014/IIH

- 10 -

ividuals unk

mplained of,

n furtherance

CE PRESCRD THIRD-P

randed drug—

r or an “auth

branded ma

n that within

e market, i.e

ng to IMS H

ns steadily sin

tes.6

icine use and sh), at 51,

HI_US_Use_of_

known to Pla

f, and perform

e of the unla

RIPTION DPARTY PAY

—whether a

horized gene

anufacturer—

a year of ge

e., pharmacis

Health data, g

nce 2004, an

hifting costs of

f_Meds_for_20

aintiff at this

med acts and

awful conduc

DRUG COSTYORS

a generic man

ric,” or “bra

—enter the m

eneric entry,

sts will fill 9

generic drug

nd as of 2013

f healthcare: A

013.pdf.

s time

d made

ct alleged he

TS

nufactured a

anded generi

market, they

generics

90 of every 1

gs as a whole

3, account fo

A review of the

erein.

and

c,”

100

e

or

use


4

their bran

enters the

competit

demonstr

7 FDA

http://www

When2.

nded counter

e market low

ion for sales

rates this eff

A, Generic Comw.fda.gov/Abou

n generic dru

rparts. Indee

wers the pric

s and market

fect in the fo

mpetition and DutFDA/Centers

ugs are launc

ed, in a comp

es of all sim

t share. A Fo

llowing char

Drug Prices, sOffices/Office

- 11 -

ched, they ar

petitive mark

milar generic

ood and Drug

rt:7

eofMedicalPro

re typically p

ket, each suc

products be

g Administra

oductsandToba

priced below

ccessive gen

cause each e

ation (“FDA

acco/CDER/ucm

w the prices o

neric product

entry increas

A”) study

m129385.htm.

of

t that

ses


4

by a riva

44

a “mature

drug pric

4

billions o

private h

the cost o

generic m

between

8 FTC

2010), ava9 Gen

http://www

More 3.

l drug comp

A Fed4.

e generic ma

ces.”8

Thus, 5.

of dollars in

ealth insurer

of drug purch

medicines sa

2005 and 20

C Staff Study, Pailable at http://

neric Pharmacew.gphaonline.o

recent evide

any typically

deral Trade C

arket, generi

generic com

savings to c

rs, health and

hases by cov

aved the U.S

014.9

PAY-FOR-DELA

/emmanuelcom

eutical Associaorg/media/wysi

ence obtaine

y generates

Commission

ic prices are,

mpetition to e

onsumers, p

d welfare fu

vered individ

. healthcare

AY: HOW DRUG

mbe.org/delay.p

ation, Generic Diwyg/PDF/GPh

- 12 -

d by the GA

a 20% price

n study confir

, on average,

even a single

pharmacies, a

unds, and stat

duals. Indeed

system $254

G COMPANY PA

pdf.

Drug Savings ihA_Savings_R

AO suggests

decline.

rmed the FD

, 85% lower

e brand drug

and other dru

te Medicaid

d, one study

4 billion in 2

AY-OFFS COST

in the U.S., at 1Report_2015.pd

that each su

DA’s analyse

r than the pre

g can provid

ug purchase

programs, w

y found that t

2014 alone, a

CONSUMERS B

1 (2015), df.

ubsequent en

es, finding th

e-entry brand

e potentially

rs, as well a

which reimb

the use of

and $1.68 tri

BILLIONS, at 8

try

hat in

ded

y

s to

urse

illion

(Jan.


4

bolstered

1984, mo

the regul

selling ge

Hatch-W

fashion th

4

drug, the

drug’s N

published

experime

submitted

4

“Therape

approved

is signific

in many

Moreove

counterp

These6.

d by the enac

ore common

atory hurdle

eneric drugs

Waxman Act

hrough the f

If an A7.

n the ANDA

DA, includin

d in the refer

entation and

d in the AND

In con8.

eutic Equiva

d generic pro

cant because

cases, must—

er, in about 2

arts subject t

e consumer w

ctment of the

ly known as

es that generi

. Instead of

allows gener

filing of an A

ANDA appli

A applicant m

ng safety an

renced brand

clinical trial

DA is insuff

nnection with

lence Code”

oduct is thera

e under state

—substitute

20 states, non

to certain co

welfare-enha

e Drug Price

s the “Hatch-

ic drug manu

filing a leng

ric drug man

Abbreviated

icant shows

may rely on

d efficacy da

d drug’s ND

ls. The FDA

ficient to mee

h the approv

” ranging fro

apeutically e

e generic dru

the branded

n-AB rated g

onsiderations

- 13 -

ancing attribu

e Competitio

-Waxman A

ufacturers ha

gthy and cost

nufacturers t

New Drug A

that the gen

scientific an

ata. The abil

A obviates t

A must appro

et the requir

val of a gene

om “AA” to “

equivalent to

ug substitutio

product for

generic drug

s, including i

utes of gene

on and Patent

Act.” The Hat

ave to clear

tly New Dru

to obtain FD

Application

eric drug is b

nd other data

lity to rely o

the need for

ove an ANDA

rements unde

eric drug, the

“BX.” An “A

o its branded

on laws, pha

its cheaper

gs can be sub

informed co

eric drug com

t Term Resto

tch-Waxman

prior to mar

ug Applicatio

DA approval

(“ANDA”).

bioequivalen

a compiled in

on the scienti

duplicative

A unless the

er the Hatch

e FDA will a

AB” rating s

d counterpart

armacists are

generic coun

bstituted for

onsent from p

mpetition we

oration Act

n Act simpli

rketing and

on (“NDA”)

in an expedi

nt to the bran

n the brand

ific data

and expensi

e information

h-Waxman A

assign a

signifies that

t. An AB rat

e permitted—

nterpart.

their brande

patient or

ere

of

fies

, the

ited

nd

ive

n

Act.

t the

ting

—and,

ed


physician

inures to

4

easier for

market.

5

ER is der

used as m

A

5

name De

21-168 fo

ER on Au

ER was a

B

5

ER in the

sellers of

players in

E

10

http://pharmd=220901&

n and whethe

the financia

In sum9.

r generic dru

FACT

Divalp0.

rived from v

medicine sinc

A. Brand

AbbV1.

epakote ER®

or the approv

ugust 4, 200

a blockbuste

B. Gener

Gener2.

e United Stat

f divalproex

n the market

ER in January

macistsletter.th&AspxAutoDe

er the switch

al benefit of

m, the stream

ug manufactu

TUAL BACK

proex ER is

valproate, wh

ce the 1960s

d Manufact

Vie manufact

®. AbbVie’s

val of Depak

00, and Abbo

er drug for A

ric Manufac

ric drug man

tes are Myla

ER, while D

t.

(a) My

y 2009.

herapeuticreseaetectCookieSup

h is appropri

consumers a

mlined appro

urers to brin

KGROUND

a drug used

hich has been

s.

turer of Div

tures and sel

predecessor

kote ER on S

ott Laborator

AbbVie, gene

cturers of D

nufacturers th

an, Par, Dr. R

Dr. Reddy’s,

ylan received

arch.com/pl/Arpport=1.

- 14 -

iate in a phar

and third-par

oval process

ng competing

D REGARD

to treat mig

n known sin

valproex ER

ls a branded

r-in-interest,

September 3

ries began se

erating over

Divalproex E

hat currently

Reddy’s, and

Impax, and

d approval to

rticleDD.aspx?

rmacist’s pro

rty payors.

under the H

g and cheape

DING DIVA

graine headac

nce the late 1

R

d version of d

Abbott Lab

30, 1999. The

elling the dru

$900 million

ER

y market gen

d Zydus. My

Zydus are s

o market gen

?nidchk=1&cs=

ofessional ju

Hatch-Waxma

er generic pr

ALPROEX E

ches in adult

19th century

divalproex E

boratories, su

e FDA appro

ug soon ther

n in sales.

neric version

ylan and Par

smaller, but s

neric version

=&s=PL&pt=2

udgment.10 T

an Act make

roducts to

ER

ts. Divalproe

and has bee

ER under the

ubmitted ND

oved Depak

reafter. Depa

ns of divalpro

are the large

still significa

ns of divalpr

2&segment=11

This

es it

ex

en

e

DA

ote

akote

oex

est

ant,

roex

186&d


ap

d

E

E

A

5

divalproe

prices of

complain

bottle co

compared

$1,100 a

54

market. M

11 Phi

23, 2015), 12 Rob

http://link.13 Id.

pproval to m

ivalproex ER

ER in May 20

ER in Februa

A. DefenDival

As pa3.

ex ER sold to

f divalproex E

ned that whil

st $1,629.95

d it to “going

gallon.”13

Drug 4.

Mylan and P

ilip Moeller, Hhttp://www.pb

b Low, Rising fox4kc.com/13

(b) Par

market generi

(c) Dr

R in March 2

(d) Im

009.

(e) Zy

ary 2009.

DE

ndants Consproex ER

rt of their co

o consumers

ER have rise

le a 500-unit

5 by August 2

g to the gas

market analy

Par are by far

How are rising gbs.org/newshou

cost some of g3AVSWG.

r’s predeces

ic versions o

. Reddy’s re

2012.

mpax received

ydus received

EFENDANT

spired to Fix

onspiracy, D

s in the Unit

en seven-fol

t bottle of di

2013.12 So s

pump at fou

ysts have no

r the domina

generic drug pur/making-sens

generic drugs s

- 15 -

sor-in-intere

of divalproex

eceived appro

d approval to

d approval to

TS’ WRON

x, Raise, Ma

efendants ag

ed States. Be

d from $31 t

valproex ER

steep was the

ur dollars a g

oted that diva

ant players in

prices affectingse/price-increa

set to shock con

est, Anchen P

x ER in Mar

oval to mark

o market gen

o market gen

NGDOING

aintain, and

greed to rais

etween Octo

to $234.11 O

R cost $122.9

e price incre

gallon one da

alproex ER i

n the divalpr

g you on Medicases-generic-dru

nsumers, FOX4

Pharmaceuti

rch 2009.

ket generic v

neric version

neric version

d Stabilize t

e the prices

ober 2013 an

One Kansas C

99 in May 2

ase that one

ay and the ne

is a “low com

roex ER mar

care?, PBS NEugs/.

4 (Aug. 14, 20

icals, receive

versions of

ns of divalpr

ns of divalpr

the Prices of

of generic

nd April 201

City pharmac

013, that sam

pharmacist

ext day it’s

mpetition”

rket, and tog

EWSHOUR (A

013),

ed

roex

roex

f

4,

cy

me

gether

Apr.


have wel

significan

5

divalproe

as well a

including

by them,

prices wh

5

prices of

report fou

5

Demand

divalproe

material

5

subject to

analyzed

below sh

and July

14 Mo

ll over 50% o

nt shares of

Trade5.

ex ER manu

s allocate m

g Dr. Reddy’

as well as a

henever Dr.

Defen6.

f divalproex E

und that “co

Defen7.

for divalpro

ex ER prices

shortages th

Plaint8.

o a non-discl

d shows that

hows the ave

2015:

organ Stanley,

of the divalp

the generic d

association

facturers wit

arkets. Myla

’s, Impax, an

allocate mark

Reddy’s, Im

ndants’ consp

ER in the Un

ompanies hav

ndants’ dival

oex ER has n

s rose in or a

hat would hav

tiff analyzed

losure agree

the price hik

rage price pe

Specialty Phar

proex ER ma

divalproex E

meetings, in

th the oppor

an and Par m

nd Zydus, an

kets. As a res

mpax, and Zy

piracy enabl

nited States.

ve been raisi

lproex ER pr

not materially

around the la

ve constrain

d several sour

ement), inclu

kes for divalp

er unit (table

rmaceuticals R

- 16 -

arket. Dr. Re

ER market.

ncluding tho

rtunity to me

met with their

nd agreed to

sult of the ag

ydus raised th

led them to r

Indeed, a Ja

ing prices on

ricing canno

y changed b

ast quarter of

ned Defendan

rces of data

uding CMS’s

proex ER we

et) of generi

Rx Trends in Pic

eddy’s, Impa

ose sponsore

eet and agree

r fellow diva

raise the pri

greement, M

heirs—and v

raise and ma

anuary 2014

n divalproex

ot be explain

etween 2010

f 2013, there

nts’ ability to

for divalpro

s NADAC d

ere generally

c divalproex

ctures, Jan. 27

ax, and Zydu

d by GPhA,

e to fix dival

alproex ER p

ices of dival

Mylan and Pa

vice versa.

aintain supra

4 Morgan Sta

x . . . aggress

ed by norma

0 and the pre

e were no kn

o supply the

oex ER (som

data. The dat

y industry-w

x ER betwee

, 2014

us also have

provided

lproex ER pr

producers,

lproex ER so

ar raised thei

acompetitive

anley analys

ively.”14

al market for

esent. At the

nown raw

e market.

me of which i

a Plaintiff

wide. The ch

en October 2

rices,

old

ir

st

rces.

e time

is

art

012


5

over 920

per tablet

6

divalproe

Cummin

250 mg,

500 mg,

500 mg,

500 mg,

6

substanti

deprived

The N9.

%, from an a

t as of Septe

Simila0.

ex ER 250 m

gs in their le

100 units

100 units

300 units

80 units

Furthe1.

ially above th

, and continu

NADAC data

average mar

ember 19, 20

arly staggeri

mg and 500 m

etters to diva

er, although

heir pre-Sep

ues to depriv

a show that p

rket price of

013.

ing prices in

mg tablets, a

alproex ER p

$30

$43

$145

$31

divalproex E

ptember 2013

ve, Plaintiff

- 17 -

prices for ge

$0.31 per ta

creases were

as noted by S

producers.

ER prices ha

3 prices. Def

and member

eneric divalp

ablet as of Se

e found for d

Senator Sand

$179

$351

$880

$235

ave eroded s

fendants’ co

rs of the Cla

proex ER 500

eptember 12

different pac

ders and Rep

somewhat, th

oordinated pr

asses the ben

0 mg increas

2, 2013 to $3

ckage sizes o

presentative

566%

667%

570%

736%

hey still rem

ricing has

nefits of free

sed

3.18

of

ain

and


open com

Plaintiff

generic d

B

6

market.

6

raise, ma

ER. The

from cap

64

numerou

in

d

an

E

co

co

mpetition—n

and member

divalproex E

B. Defenand M

There2.

Rathe3.

aintain, and s

price increa

ptive drug pu

In form4.

us anticompe

n the United

ivalproex ER

nd otherwise

ER sold to pu

ollusive and

ollusive and

namely, lowe

rs of the Cla

ER.

ndants’ ConMarkets for

are no mark

r, Defendant

stabilize the

ses were the

urchasers.

mulating and

etitive activit

(a) Att

States by te

R;

(b) Ag

e fix, increas

urchasers in t

(c) Sel

d non-compet

(d) Ac

d non-compet

er prices for

asses have pa

nspiratorial Generic Di

ket-based rea

ts sustained

prices of, an

e product of D

d effectuatin

ties, includin

tending joint

lephone, fac

greeing to ch

se, maintain,

the United S

lling divalpr

titive prices

ccepting paym

titive prices;

- 18 -

generic vers

aid and conti

Conduct toivalproex ER

asons for the

these suprac

nd allocate m

Defendants’

ng their cons

ng, among ot

t meetings o

csimile, and

harge prices f

, and stabiliz

States;

roex ER to c

pursuant to

ments for di

;

sions of diva

inue to pay n

o Fix PricesR

e pricing pat

competitive

markets and c

’ shared desi

spiracy, Defe

ther things:

or otherwise

electronic m

for divalproe

ze the prices

ustomers in

the agreeme

ivalproex ER

alproex ER.

non-competi

and Allocat

tterns in the

profits by co

customers fo

ire to extract

endants enga

engaging in

mail regardin

ex ER at spe

and supply

the United S

ent reached;

R sold in the

As a result,

itive prices f

te Custome

divalproex E

onspiring to

or divalproex

t monopoly r

aged in

n joint discus

ng the sale of

ecified levels

of divalproe

States at

United Stat

for

rs

ER

fix,

x

rents

ssions

f

s,

ex

tes at


m

U

co

v

6

commun

maintain

6

members

prices for

present.

GENER

A

6

conduciv

market ex

commod

competit

markets, supp

United States

onspiracy; a

arious mean

The p5.

ications was

an unlawful

As a r6.

s of the Clas

r divalproex

RIC MARKE

A. FactoMark

The st7.

ve to collusio

xhibited: (1)

itization; (4)

ors acting ag

(e) Co

ply and manu

s;

(f) Au

nd

(g) Co

ns.

urpose of th

s to ensure th

l price-fixing

result of Def

ses were inju

x ER sold in t

ET FOR DI

ors Supportiket

tructure and

on and price-

) high barrier

) a high degr

gainst their e

ommunicatin

ufacturing is

uthorizing or

oncealing the

ese secret, c

hat all Defen

g and marke

fendants’ unl

ured because

the United S

IVALPROECON

ing the Exis

other charac

-fixing. Spec

rs to entry; (

ree of concen

economic sel

- 19 -

ng with one a

ssues, and pr

r consenting

e conspiracy

conspiratoria

ndants agreed

et and custom

lawful agree

e they paid,

States during

EX ER IS SUNSPIRACY

stence of a C

cteristics of t

cifically, dur

(2) inelastici

ntration; (5)

lf-interest; a

another to di

rice levels of

to the partic

y and conspir

al meetings, d

d to particip

mer allocatio

ement to rest

and continue

g the period O

USCEPTIBY

Conspiracy

the divalpro

ring the Clas

ity of deman

substantial

and (7) oppor

iscuss the pr

f divalproex

cipation of em

ratorial conta

discussions,

ate in, imple

on scheme.

train trade, P

e to pay, sup

October 1, 2

BLE TO A P

in the Diva

oex ER mark

ss Period, th

nd; (3) a high

manufacture

rtunities to c

rices, custom

x ER sold in

mployees in

acts through

and

ement, and

Plaintiff and

pracompetiti

2013 through

PRICE FIX

lproex ER

ket and make

he divalproex

h degree of

er overlap; (6

conspire.

mers,

the

n the

h

ive

h the

XING

e it

x ER

6)


6

would, un

competit

much les

maintena

6

7

and the c

generic d

receive F

7

bioequiv

productio

million.15

increase

7

Ingredien

products

7

and guida

15 Tes

20, 2014),

1.

A coll8.

nder basic e

ive pricing.

ss likely to en

ance of a car

The d9.

Even 0.

costs of doin

drug manufa

FDA approva

To file1.

alent to its b

on lines capa

5 A generic m

the costs of

Moreo2.

nt (“API”) fo

.

Prosp3.

ance govern

stimony of Dr.at 7.

There AreMarket

lusive arrang

conomic pri

When, howe

nter the mark

rtel.

divalproex ER

though diva

g business m

cturer seekin

al.

e an ANDA

branded coun

able of maki

manufacture

production.

over, a gener

or divalproex

ective gener

ning bioequiv

Scott Gottlieb

e High Barr

gement that r

nciples, attra

ever, there ar

ket. Thus, ba

R market ha

lproex ER is

make market

ng to enter th

, the generic

nterpart and

ing the drug.

er’s producti

ric manufact

x ER must h

ric manufactu

valence and

b, Hearing on “

- 20 -

riers to Entr

raises produ

act new entr

re significan

arriers to ent

s high barrie

s not protect

t entry difficu

he divalproe

c manufactur

invest consi

Historically

on facilities

turer that can

have a reliabl

urers must a

bioavailabili

“Why Are Som

ry in the Ge

uct prices abo

rants seeking

nt barriers to

try help faci

ers to entry.

ted by any pa

ult, time con

ex ER marke

rer must sho

iderable reso

y, the cost of

must also m

nnot produc

le and afford

also be able t

ity of their d

me Generic Dru

eneric Dival

ove competi

g to benefit f

o entry, new

ilitate the for

atents, regul

nsuming, and

et must file a

w that the ge

ources in the

f filing an A

meet CGMP

e the Active

dable source

to satisfy FD

divalproex E

ugs Skyrocketin

lproex ER

itive levels

from the sup

entrants are

rmation and

latory hurdle

d expensive.

an ANDA an

eneric produ

developmen

ANDA is abo

standards, w

e Pharmaceu

e of API for t

DA regulatio

ER products.

ng in Price?” (N

pra-

es

. Any

nd

uct is

nt of

out $1

which

utical

these

ons

This

Nov.


requires

the same

74

labeling o

These de

7

compete

significan

Indeed, th

more.17

7

changes i

price of a

other wo

and so co

7

be relativ

sales, rev

altogethe

producer

16 Id. 17 GA

Extraordin

showing tha

therapeutic

The fa4.

of divalproe

elays can last

Even 5.

on price reg

ntly “backlo

he FDA has

2.

“Elast6.

in one or the

a product res

rds, custome

ontinue to pu

For a 7.

vely inelastic

venues, and p

er. Inelastic d

rs to raise the

at 7.

AO, Generic Drnary Price Incr

at the propos

qualities an

ailure to mee

x ER will re

t for months

if a non-con

garding dival

ogged,” any p

stated that a

Inelasticit

ticity” is a te

e other. For e

sults in only

ers have now

urchase the p

cartel to pro

c at competit

profits as cu

demand is a

eir prices wi

rugs Under Mereases, No. 16-

ed generic d

d absorption

et all FDA re

esult in the F

or even yea

nspiring gene

lproex ER, d

potential ent

as of fiscal y

ty of Deman

erm used to d

example, dem

a small decl

where to turn

product desp

ofit from rais

tive prices. O

ustomers purc

market char

thout trigger

edicare: Part D-706, at 26 (Au

- 21 -

divalproex ER

n profiles as

equirements

FDA delayin

ars.

eric manufac

due to the fac

trant would n

year 2015, A

nd for Dival

describe the

mand is said

line, if any, i

n for alternat

pite the price

sing prices ab

Otherwise, in

chased subst

racteristic tha

ring custome

D Generic Druug. 2016), http:

R products h

their brande

concerning

g (or denyin

cturer were t

ct that the FD

necessarily b

ANDA approv

lproex ER

sensitivity o

d to be “inela

in the quanti

tive, cheaper

e increase.

bove compe

ncreased pri

titute produc

at facilitates

er substitutio

ug Prices Decli://www.gao.go

have, among

ed counterpa

manufactur

ng) approval

to see an opp

DA’s review

be delayed fo

vals can take

of supply an

astic” if an in

ity sold of th

r products of

etitive levels

ices would re

cts or decline

s collusion, a

on and lost s

ined Overall, bov/assets/680/6

g other thing

arts.

ring, testing,

of an ANDA

portunity to

w of ANDAs

for years.16

e 40 months

d demand to

ncrease in th

hat product.

f similar qua

, demand mu

esult in decl

ed to buy

allowing

sales revenue

but Some Had 679022.pdf.

gs,

and

A.

s is

s or

o

he

In

ality,

ust

ining

e.


7

which the

7

anticonvu

divalproe

pharmaco

a result, t

substitute

8

Although

divalproe

8

divalproe

over thei

8

captive to

allocate m

8

usually fo

services.

a commo

because p

Dema8.

ere is no rea

Divalp9.

ulsants are n

ex ER and ot

okinetic prof

these compo

ed for divalp

Even 0.

h valproate d

ex ER, none

Brand1.

ex ER. This

r generic cou

Thus, 2.

o the supraco

markets and

3.

When3.

forced to com

When price

oditized prod

price-based

and for divalp

asonable sub

proex ER is

not reasonabl

ther anticonv

files when c

ounds are not

proex ER at t

within the su

derivatives, s

is an AB-ra

ded divalproe

is because b

unterparts, m

purchasers o

ompetitive p

customers.

Divalproe

n products ar

mpete on pric

e becomes a

duct have an

collusion is

proex ER is

stitute.

used to treat

le substitute

vulsants. Fo

ompared to

t considered

the pharmac

ubclass of va

such as valpr

ated equivale

ex ER does n

branded prod

making them

of generic di

prices that re

ex ER Is a C

re subject to

ce, as oppos

significant f

easier time

much easier

- 22 -

highly inela

t migraines a

s because of

r example, g

valproate, fr

d therapeutic

cy level.

alproate deri

roic acid, ha

ent to divalpr

not serve as

ducts general

m inapt substi

ivalproex ER

esulted from

Commodity

commoditiz

ed to other f

factor in driv

colluding on

r to impleme

astic because

and seizures

f the therape

gabapentin a

rom which d

ally equivale

ivatives, div

ave similar th

roex ER.

an economi

lly maintain

itutes even w

R have been

Defendants

Product

zation, produ

factors, such

ving demand

n price than

ent and moni

e it is a uniqu

s in adults. O

eutic differen

and topirama

divalproex E

ent and wou

valproex ER

herapeutic p

ic substitute

substantial p

when generic

n and continu

’ conspiracy

ucers of thos

h as quality a

d for a produ

other non-pr

itor.

ue product f

Other

nces between

ate have diffe

R is derived

uld not be

stands apart

roperties to

for generic

price premiu

c prices soar

ue to be held

y to fix price

se products a

and ancillary

uct, producer

rice factors

for

n

erent

d. As

t.

ums

r.

d

s and

are

y

rs of


84

products

FDA, wh

bioequiv

generic f

rated gen

also be ab

8

version, e

their resp

8

or detaili

free samp

product f

price can

8

practices

8

of compa

8

manufact

18 See

Brief (Dec

Gener4.

because the

hen approvin

alent to the b

for its brande

neric for the

ble to substi

Defen5.

enabling pha

pective state

Moreo6.

ing their gen

ples to physi

from another

n drive produ

4.

A con7.

.

The d8.

anies: Mylan

The li9.

turers’ abilit

e Congressiona. 2, 2009), at 1

ric drugs of t

primary me

ng an ANDA

brand’s NDA

ed counterpa

same brande

itute non-AB

ndants’ dival

armacists to

’s generic su

over, becaus

neric compou

icians), the p

r generic com

ucers of com

The Gene

ncentrated m

divalproex ER

n, Par, Dr. R

imited numb

ty to coordin

al Budget Offic.

the same che

echanism thr

A, is required

A, an AB-rat

art, as well a

ed product. (

B rated drugs

lproex ER pr

substitute th

ubstitution la

se generic m

unds (i.e., the

primary mea

mpetitor’s is

mmodity prod

eric Divalpr

market is mor

R market is h

eddy’s, Imp

ber of divalpr

nate pricing f

ce, Promotiona

- 23 -

emical comp

rough which

d to determin

ting permits

s to substitu

(Depending

s, provided t

roducts are A

hem for the b

aws.

anufacturers

e practice of

ans for one g

s through pri

ducts to cons

oex ER Ma

re susceptibl

highly conce

ax, and Zydu

roex ER man

for divalproe

al Spending for

position are e

h they compe

ne whether a

a pharmacis

ute one AB-r

on a given s

that certain c

AB-rated gen

branded vers

s generally s

f providing p

generic manu

ice reduction

spire—as the

arket Is High

e to collusio

entrated and

dus.

nufacturers f

ex ER. This

r Prescription D

effectively c

ete is price. B

a generic dru

st to substitu

rated generic

state’s law, a

conditions ar

nerics of the

sion automat

spend little e

promotional

ufacturer to d

ns.18 The nee

ey did here—

hly Concent

on and other

d is dominate

facilitated th

concentratio

Drugs, Econom

commodity

Because the

ug product is

ute an AB-ra

c for another

a pharmacist

re met.)

eir branded

tically under

ffort adverti

materials an

differentiate

ed to compet

—to fix price

trated

anticompeti

ed by a hand

hose

on also made

mic & Budget I

s

ated

r AB-

t may

r

ising

nd

its

te on

es.

itive

dful

e it

Issues


easy for t

upon pric

9

fix, raise

generic d

9

products

generic m

productio

manufact

criminal

Doxycycl

for the E

them to mon

ces.

As the0.

, and mainta

drug manufa

5.

The d1.

and thus, ha

manufacturer

on and sales

turers also m

investigation

line Antitrus

astern Distri

GenericCompa

nitor prices in

e dominant p

ain their pric

cturers.

Manufact

dominant man

ave overlapp

rs. This prod

of these ove

make digoxin

n and numer

st Litigation

ict of Pennsy

c ny

Dig

n the downs

players in th

es for divalp

turers of Ge

nufacturers

ping product

duct overlap

erlapping pro

n and doxycy

rous civil cla

now pendin

ylvania, as w

goxin Do

- 24 -

stream marke

e divalproex

proex ER w

eneric Dival

of generic di

portfolios w

incentivizes

oducts. For e

ycline, two d

ass actions in

g before Jud

well as other

oxycycline DE

et and police

x ER market

without comp

lproex ER H

divalproex al

with other no

s these manu

example, ma

drugs that ar

n In re Gene

dge Cynthia

generic drug

Divalproex ER

e deviations

t, Defendants

petitive threa

Have Overla

so make sev

on-divalproe

ufacturers to

any divalpro

re the subjec

eric Digoxin

Rufe in the

gs:

Pravastat

from agreed

s were able t

ats from rival

apping Prod

veral other dr

x producing

coordinate

oex ER

ts of both a D

and

District Cou

tin

d-

to

l

ducts

rug

g

DOJ

urt


:

9

incentive

9

price thei

with the u

price, tak

aggressiv

94

competit

Actavis

Apotex

Dr. Red

Impax

Glenm

Lannet

Lupin

Mayne

Mylan

Par

Sun

Teva

West-W

Zydus

This p2.

e to conspire

6.

Comp3.

ir products a

understandin

king sales—a

vely.

Here, 4.

ors. Rather t

s

x

ddy’s

ark

tt

Ward

product over

e to fix prices

Defendan

petitive firms

aggressively

ng that if the

and ultimate

however, D

than attempt

rlap provided

s and allocat

nts’ Pricing A

s in a compe

, relative to t

ey do not do

ely market sh

efendants fa

t to take sale

- 25 -

d these manu

te sales of th

Actions We

etitive, comm

their compet

so, other co

hare—away

ailed to price

s, revenue, a

ufacturers w

hese product

ere Against

moditized ma

titors’ produ

ompetitors un

from the firm

e aggressivel

and market s

with the oppo

s.

Their Self-I

arketplace w

ucts. Firms p

ndercut their

ms that are p

ly relative to

share away f

ortunity and

Interest

will typically

price aggress

r relatively h

pricing less

o their

from one ano

y

sively

high

other,


Defendan

supracom

9

to gain sa

gains in f

from com

competin

9

its memb

9

their con

associatio

of generi

9

Impax, M

derives th

(2) produ

9

Directors

Bresch, P

Chairper

nts instead s

mpetitive pric

Such c5.

ales, revenue

favor of cart

mpetitors sug

ng on price.

7.

In ord6.

bers to ensur

Defen7.

spiratorial c

on is the Gen

ic pharmaceu

Curren8.

Mylan, Par, a

he majority o

ucts sold as a

Sever9.

s, including:

Par’s Tony P

son.

ought to me

ces from Pla

conduct was

es, and mark

tel pricing. D

ggests that D

MembersWith Opp

der to be sust

re that all are

ndants were

ommunicati

neric Pharm

utical manuf

nt “Regular

and Zydus. R

of its revenu

authorized g

al of Defend

Dr. Reddy’

Pera, and Zyd

et the price i

aintiff and m

s against Def

ket share, De

Defendants’ f

Defendants w

hips in the Sportunities t

tained, consp

e adhering to

members of

ons and imp

maceutical As

facturers.

Members” o

Regular Mem

ues from sale

eneric drugs

dants’ high-r

s Alok Sonig

dus’ Joseph

- 26 -

increases ma

members of th

fendants’ sel

efendants ins

failure to cut

were conspiri

Same Tradeto Conspire

piracies requ

o the collecti

f trade assoc

plement their

ssociation (“

of the GPhA

mbers are ent

es of (1) fini

s; (3) biosim

ranking offic

g, Impax’s M

Renner. Ms

ade by other

he Classes.

lf-interest be

stead sought

ut prices in th

ing to fix an

e Associatioe

uire periodic

ive scheme.

ciations, whi

r price-fixing

“GPhA”), wh

A include Def

tities whose

ished dose dr

milar product

cers also serv

Marcy Macd

s. Bresch serv

rs and extrac

ecause rather

t to sacrifice

he face of pr

nd raise price

ons Provide

c communica

ch they used

g scheme. O

hich is the la

fendants Dr.

primary U.S

rugs approve

s; or (4) DE

ve on GPhA

donald, Myla

rves as the G

ct

r than cut pr

these potent

rice increases

es, rather tha

d Defendan

ations betwe

d to facilitate

One such trad

argest associ

. Reddy’s,

S. business

ed via AND

SI products.

A’s Board of

an’s Heather

GPhA’s curre

rices

tial

s

an

nts

een

e

de

iation

As;

r

ent


1

table lists

manufact

2012 GP

2012 GPConferen

2013 GP

2013 GP

2013 GPConferen

2014 GP

2014 GP

1

Defendan

2013, as

30th AnnuHealthca

31st AnnuHealthca

Repre00.

s some of th

turers attend

Meeting

hA Annual M

hA Fall Tecnce

hA Annual M

hA CMC W

hA Fall Tecnce

hA Annual M

hA CMC W

Defen01.

nts’ represen

did represen

Meeting

ual JP Morgare Conferen

ual JP Morgare Conferen

esentatives fr

e GPhA mee

ded as well):

Meeting

hnical

Meeting

Workshop

hnical

Meeting

Workshop

ndants also ro

ntatives atten

ntatives of ot

gan ce

an ce

rom Defenda

etings attend

Meeting D

February 22Orlando, Fl

October 1-3Bethesda, M


June 4-5, 20Maryland

October 28-Bethesda, M


June 3-4, 20

outinely gath

nded the ann

ther generic

Meeting D

January 201San Francis

January 7-1San Francis

- 27 -

ants attended

ded by Defen

Date and Lo

2-24, 2012, lorida

3, 2012, Maryland

0-22, 2013, lorida

013, Bethesd

-30, 2013, Maryland

9-21, 2014, lorida

014

hered at non

nual JP Morg

drug manufa

Date and Lo

12, sco, Californ

10, 2013, sco, Californ

d meetings h

ndants’ emp

ocation

M

ImPa

ImRe

da, DrZy

ImRe

ImRe

DrZy

n-GPhA spon

gan Healthca

facturers:

ocation

nia

Im

nia

Im

held by GPhA

loyees (othe

Att

Mylan, Par

mpax, Mylanar, Zydus

mpax, Mylaneddy’s, Zydu

r. Reddy’s, Iydus



r. Reddy’s, Iydus

nsored event

are Conferen

Att

mpax, Mylan

mpax, Mylan

A. The follo

er generic dru

endees

n, Dr. Reddy

n, Par, Dr. us

Impax, Par,

n, Par, Dr. us

n, Par, Dr. us

Impax, Par,

ts. For exam

nces in 2012

endees

n, Par

n, Par

owing

ug

y’s,

mple,

and


1

focusing

used by D

scheme.

1

anticomp

other dru

A

1

certain ge

driving th

Member

Sanders,

Health, E

informati

medical c

1

Mylan, P

Pharmac

pricing o

albuterol

19 Ran

Drugs, http

Thus, 02.

on trade ass

Defendants’

Upon 03.

petitive schem

ugs, and how

GOVERNM

A. Cong

As ne04.

eneric drugs

hese price hi

of the Hous

Chairman o

Education, L

ion about the

conditions to

These05.

Par, Teva, an

euticals Inc.

of many gene

l sulfate, glyc

nking Memberp://www.sande

it is not surp

sociations, in

sales repres

information

me to raise,

w to allocate

MENT INVE

ressional In

ws reports h

s, members o

ikes. On Oct

e Committee

of the Subcom

Labor and Pen

e escalating

o life-threate

e letters were

nd Zydus, am

, and Marath

eric drugs, in

copyrrolate,

rs Cummings aers.senate.gov/d

prising that,

ncluding GPh

entatives to

n and belief,

maintain, an

markets and

ESTIGATI

nvestigation

have prolifer

of Congress

tober 2, 2014

e on Oversig

mmittee on P

nsions, “sen

prices of gen

ening illness

e delivered to

mong others—

hon Pharmac

ncluding div

neostigmine

and Chairman Sdownload/face

- 28 -

according to

hA, because

coordinate a

Defendants’

nd stabilize t

d customers,

IONS INTO

s into Gene

ated with res

have expres

4, Represent

ght and Gove

Primary Hea

nt letters to 1

neric drugs u

es.”19

o the heads o

—including E

ceuticals, LL

valproex ER,

e methylsulf

Sanders Invest-sheet-on-gene

o public repo

e these trade

and impleme

’ employees

the prices of

at these mee

O GENERIC

eric Drug Pr

spect to the

sed a growin

tative Elijah

ernment Ref

alth and Agin

4 drug manu

used to treat

of Actavis, A

Endo Pharm

LC—seeking

pravastatin,

fate, benazep

tigate Staggerineric-drug-price

orts, DOJ’s c

associations

ent their anti

discussed th

f divalproex

etings, amon

C DRUG PR

ricing

dramatic ris

ng concern a

E. Cummin

form, and Se

ng, Senate C

ufacturers re

t everything

Apotex, Dr.

maceuticals p

g informatio

, digoxin, do

pril/hydroch

ng Price Increae-increases?inli

criminal pro

s may have b

icompetitive

heir

ER, as well

ng others.

RICING

e in price of

as to what is

ngs, the Rank

enator Berna

Committee o

equesting

from comm

Reddy’s, Im

plc, Heritage

on about the

oxycycline,

hlorothiazide

ases for Generiine=file.

obe is

been

e

as

f

king

ard

n

mon

mpax,

e

,

ic


Isuprel®

Defendan

divalproe

1

1

connectio

experienc

20 See

http://www(citing Letthttps://ww

(isoproteren

nts received

ex ER:

Each l06.

This dfor paAssocacrossare hupharmlarge uhave amedicdeclinpharmhavingcontin

Furthe07.

on with their

ced over the

e, e.g., Ltr. fromw.sanders.senatter from B. Dow.ncpanet.org/

nol hydrochl

letters from

D

M

P

Z

letter stated:

dramatic incratients. Accociation (NCPs the countryurting patientmacists reporupswing in aa direct impacations. The ning their memacists said tg a ‘very signue serving p

er, Senator S

r letters, dem

past several

m Sen. Bernardte.gov/downloa

ouglas Hoey to /pdf/leg/jan14/

loride), and N

m Senator San

GENERIC

Dr. Reddy’s

Mylan

Par

Zydus

:

rease in geneording to the PA), a 2013 my “have seents[’] and pha

rted 26 or moa generic druact on patienNCPA surve

edication duethat the acqugnificant’ impatients.”20

Sanders and

monstrating t

l years:

d Sanders & Rad/letter-to-mrSen. Tom Har

/letter-generic-

- 29 -

Nitropress®

nders and Re

MANUFACT

eric drug priNational Co

member survn huge upswiarmacies[’] aore instancesug’s acquisitnts’ ability toey found thae to increase

uisition pricempact on their

Representati

the massive p

ep. Elijah E. C-bedrosian-prerkin, et al. (Janspikes.pdf)).

® (nitroprussi

epresentative

TURER

ices results iommunity ofvey found things in generability to opes over the pation price.” To purchase that “pharmacied co-pays,” e/lagging reimr ability to re

tive Cummin

price increas

Cummings to Aesident-and-ceon. 8, 2014),

ide). The fol

e Cummings

in decreased f Pharmacisthat pharmaciric drug pricerate” and “ast six monthThese price heir needed ists reportedand “84% ombursementemain in bus

ngs publishe

ses that diva

Arthur P. Bedroo-lannett-comp

llowing

s concerning

access ts ists ces that 77% of hs of a increases

d patients of t trend is siness to

d a table in

alproex ER h

osian (Oct. 2, 2pany-inc?inline

g

has

2014), e=file


1

Senator S

Departm

immediat

1

Novembe

Pharmac

reduced c

the overa

1

prices we

on Aging

Service o

patient ac

dramatic

to stock a

shortage.

21 Co

http://www22 Sta

Off-Patent http://www

In add08.

Sanders and

ent of Health

tely and agg

The S09.

er 20, 2014.

euticals wer

competition

all market.

Subse10.

ere held in D

g’s Decembe

of the Univer

ccess and he

way, this ca

a product in

.”22

ngressional Pa

w.sanders.senat

atement of ErinDrugs: Perspe

w.aging.senate.

dition to send

Representat

h and Huma

gressively to

Senate Subco

Although th

re scheduled

across vario

equent congr

December 20

er 9, 2015 he

rsity of Utah

ealthcare, sta

an create an

the same am

anel to Probe Gte.gov/newsroo

n R. Fox, Pharmectives from thgov/imo/media

ding letters t

tive Cummin

an Services S

address the

ommittee on

he Presidents

to attend the

ous generic d

ressional hea

015 and Febr

earing, Erin D

h, noted the d

ating, “When

access issue

mount due to

Generic Drug Prom/press-relea

mD Director, De Front Lines”a/doc/SCA_Fo

- 30 -

to the generi

ngs wrote a j

Secretary, sta

increasing c

Primary He

s and CEOs

e hearing, no

drugs has con

arings concer

ruary 2016. A

D. Fox, Phar

deleterious e

n medication

e for hospital

o price increa

rice Hikes (Noses/congressio

Drug Informatio” (Dec. 9, 2015ox_12_9_15.pd

ic drug manu

joint letter to

ating, “The f

costs of these

ealth and Agi

of Lannett, T

one appeared

ntributed to

rning the dra

At the U.S. S

rmD Directo

effect these d

n prices incre

ls and patien

ases, this eff

ov. 11, 2014), nal-panel-to-pr

on Service, He), at 7,

df.

ufacturers lis

o Sylvia Bur

federal gove

e drugs.”21

ing held a he

Teva, and M

d. Many pan

the price hik

amatic rise o

Senate Spec

or of the Dru

drug prices h

ease in an un

nts. If hospita

fectively crea

robe-generic-d

earing on “Sud

sted above,

rwell, the

ernment mus

earing on

Marathon

nelists agreed

kes observed

of generic dr

ial Committ

ug Informati

have had on

npredictable

als cannot af

ates a

drug-price-hike

dden Price Spik

st act

d that

d in

rug

tee

ion

and

fford

es.

kes in


1

Daniel R

imploring

drugs and

and Med

Sanders a

previous

B

1

enforcem

manufact

generic d

1

generic d

sweeping

companie

agencies,

could be

1

of Pennsy

23 Let

http://www24 Let

http://www

On Fe11.

R. Levinson,

g the departm

d the effect t

dicaid progra

and Represe

review of ge

B. FederPricin

Gener12.

ment authorit

turers have r

drugs, as wel

Initial13.

drugs: digoxi

g nature of th

es are under

, the DOJ’s i

filed by the

A fede14.

ylvania. The

tter from Hon.

w.sanders.senat

tter from Hon. w.sanders.senat

ebruary 24, 2

the Inspecto

ment to “exa

these price in

ams.”23 On A

ntative Cum

eneric drug p

ral and Statng

ric pricing pa

ties in the Un

received sub

ll as their co

l reports sug

in and doxyc

he DOJ’s inv

criminal inv

investigation

end of 2016

eral grand ju

e result of th

Bernard Sande

te.gov/downloa

Daniel Levinste.gov/downloa

2015, Senato

or General of

amine recent

ncreases hav

April 13, 201

mmings’s lett

price increas

te Antitrust

atterns have

nited States.

bpoenas or re

mmunicatio

gest that, at

cycline. How

vestigation:

vestigation. I

n has progre

6.

ury investiga

ese investiga

ers and Elijah Cad/sanders-cum

son to Hon. Berad/oig-letter-to

- 31 -

or Sanders an

f the Departm

t increases in

ve had on ge

5, Inspector

ter, stating th

ses under the

Investigatio

also capture

Many Defen

equests for in

ns with their

the beginnin

wever, recen

at least two-

Indeed, acco

ssed to such

ating the mat

ations could

Cummings to Hmmings-letter?

rnard Sanders o-sen-sanders-4

nd Represen

ment of Hea

n the prices b

eneric drug s

r General Le

hat his office

e Medicaid d

ons into Def

ed the attenti

ndants and o

nformation c

r competitor

ng, the probe

nt news repor

-dozen drugs

ording to Blo

h a degree tha

tter is empan

d result in the

Hon. Daniel Leinline=file.

(Apr. 13, 20154-13-2015?inli

ntative Cumm

alth and Hum

being charge

spending wit

evinson respo

e planned “to

drug rebate p

fendants’ G

ion of federa

other generic

concerning t

rs for those d

es were focu

rts have con

s and a doze

oomberg and

at the first cr

neled in the

e imposition

evinson (Feb. 2

5), ine=file.

mings wrote

man Services

ed for generi

thin the Med

onded to Sen

o update our

program.”24

Generic Dru

al and state

c drug

their pricing

drugs.

used on two

nfirmed the

n drug

d other news

riminal char

Eastern Dist

n of substanti

24, 2015),

to

s,

ic

dicare

nator

r

g

of

s

rges

trict

ial


fines and

analysts h

1

state anti

1

subpoena

a contrac

(i) fixing

or territo

1

identifica

ministeri

productio

or any ot

plans, str

commerc

policy di

25 Eri

FiercePharto-sizable-

26 Imphttp://wwwut+AG/966http://finan

d criminal ple

have estimat

To da15.

itrust probes

Lanne16.

as from the C

ct, combinati

g, maintainin

ries relating

The in17.

ation of “all

ial responsib

on of “all do

ther company

rategic plans

cialization of

rected to the

ic Saonowsky, rma (Nov. 10, 2liabilities-analy

pax Laboratoriw.streetinsider.62945.html; Lance.yahoo.com

eas for gene

ted that the D

te, the gener

include:

ett. In July 2

CTAG in con

ion or consp

ng or controll

to the sale o

nformation a

persons at L

bility related

ocuments or c

y, to increas

s or any othe

f Digoxin”; a

e antitrust law

DOJ’s price-fi2016), http://wyst-says.

ies (IPXL) Reccom/Corporateannett Receive

m/news/lannett-r

ric manufact

DOJ could im

ric drug com

2014, Lannet

nnection wit

iracy in restr

ling prices o

of digoxin in

and documen

Lannett with

to the pricin

communicat

e the price o

er documents

and (4) the i

ws.”

fixing investigawww.fiercephar

ceives Subpoene+News/Impax Inquiry from Creceives-inquir

- 32 -

turers, and j

mpose fines

mpanies conta

tt revealed in

th its investi

raint of trade

of digoxin or

n violation of

nts sought by

any supervi

ng or sale of

tions referrin

of Digoxin”;

s relating to

identification

ation could leadrma.com/pharm

na from Connex+LaboratoriesConnecticut Ary-connecticut

ail time for c

in excess of

acted in con

n SEC filing

igation into w

e or commer

r (ii) allocati

f Connecticu

y the CTAG

isory, execut

f Digoxin”; (

ng or relating

(3) the prod

the developm

n and produc

d to sizable liama/doj-s-price-

ecticut AG, s+(IPXL)+Rec

Attorney Generat-attorney-1533

company ex

f $1 billion.2

nnection with

gs that they h

whether “any

rce which ha

ing and divid

ut antitrust la

G included: (

tive or other

2) the identi

g to any dec

duction of “[

ment, manuf

ction of “wri

abilities, analys-fixing-investig

eives+Subpoenal, 300612.html.

xecutives. So

25

h both federa

had received

yone engage

as the effect

ding custome

aw.”26

1) the

significant n

ification and

cision(s), by

[a]ll marketin

facture and

itten compli

st says, gation-could-le

na+from+Conn

ome

al or

d

ed in

of

ers

non-

d

you

ng

ance

ead-

nectic


1

a senior s

federal in

1

“grand ju

pharmace

that the “

financial

regarding

certain pr

requested

issued.

1

an emplo

supplied

1

concernin

allocate c

federal g

27 Ed

10, 2014). 28 Lan

http://www29 Id. 30 Lan

https://ww

Five m18.

sales and ma

nvestigation

On De19.

ury subpoena

eutical indus

“subpoena re

, and employ

g the sale of

roducts.”29 I

d informatio

Most 20.

oyee of the C

to the [DOJ

Impax21.

ng Impax’s s

customers or

rand jury su

Silverman, Ju

nnett SEC Formw.sec.gov/Arch

nnett SEC Formw.sec.gov/Arc

months later,

arketing exec

of the gener

ecember 5, 2

a related to t

stry into pos

equests corpo

yee informat

generic pres

In a 2015 SE

n and docum

recently, in

Company in

].”30

x. In July 20

sales of gene

r territories.

bpoena requ

stice Departme

m 8-K (Dec. 5,hives/edgar/dat

m 10-Q (Nov. chives/edgar/da

, on Novemb

cutive was s

ric industry i

2014, Lannet

the continuin

sible violatio

orate docum

tion, commu

scription me

EC filing, La

ments for the

June 2016, t

order to gain

014, Impax d

eric digoxin

In Novembe

uesting testim

ent Probes Gen

, 2014), ta/57725/00011

4, 2016), ata/57725/0001

- 33 -

ber 10, 2014

erved with a

into possible

tt disclosed

ng federal in

ons of the Sh

ments from th

unications or

edications, an

annett further

e period 2005

the CTAG “i

n access to d

disclosed tha

and whether

er 2014, Imp

mony and do

neric Compani

104659140854

110465916154

4, Lannett di

a DOJ grand

e violations o

in a Form 8-

nvestigation o

herman Act.

he Company

r correspond

nd the marke

r disclosed th

5 through th

issued interr

documents an

at it received

r it agreed w

pax disclosed

ocuments abo

ies After Price

406/a14-25827_

924/a16-19144

sclosed in an

d jury subpoe

of anti-trust

-K that it rec

of the gener

.”28 Lannett

y relating to c

dence with co

eting, sale, o

that the feder

he dates the s

rogatories an

nd responses

d a subpoena

with others to

d that it also

out “any com

Hike Reports,

_18k.htm.

4_110q.htm.

n SEC filing

ena “relating

laws.”27

ceived anoth

ic

further discl

corporate,

ompetitors

or pricing of

ral subpoena

subpoenas w

nd a subpoen

s previously

a from the CT

o fix prices o

o received a

mmunication

Wall. St. J. (N

g that

g to a

her

losed

f

as

were

na to

y

TAG

or

n or

Nov.


correspon

subpoena

1

grand jur

documen

medicatio

generic m

calcipotr

1

for 2014,

to comm

Lanoxin®

filing Par

documen

generic v

response

1

received

31 Imp

https://ww32 Imp33 Par

subpoena. 34 Id.

ndence with

as was not li

Later,22.

ry subpoena

nts regarding

ons. In partic

medications:

iene topical

Par. T23.

, Par disclos

unications w

® (digoxin)

r revealed th

nts related to

version of Co

on October

Actav24.

subpoenas f

pax SEC Formw.sec.gov/Arc

pax, SEC 2015

r Pharmaceutic

any compet

mited to a p

, Impax furth

from the Jus

g the sales, m

cular the Jus

digoxin, ter

solution.”32

The federal g

ed that it had

with competi

oral tablets a

hat the CTAG

our agreem

ovis’s Lanox

28, 2014.

vis. Actavis’s

from DOJ. A

m 8-K (Nov. 6, chives/edgar/da

5 Form 10-K, a

cals Companies

titor about th

articular dru

her disclosed

stice Departm

marketing, an

stice Departm

rbutaline sul

grand jury’s

d received a

itors regardin

and our gene

G served a su

ment with Cov

xin® (digoxi

s parent Alle

Allergan repo

2014), ata/1003642/00

at F-53.

s, Inc., SEC 20

- 34 -

he sale of gen

ug or a partic

d that on Ma

ment reques

nd pricing of

ment’s inves

fate tablets,

probe contin

subpoena fr

ng our autho

eric doxycyc

ubpoena on

vis Pharma S

in) oral table

ergan plc als

orted that, on

001193125144

014 Form 10-K

neric drugs.

cular timefra

arch 13, 2015

sting the prod

f certain gen

stigation curr

prilocaine/li

nues to expa

rom DOJ “re

orized generi

cline produc

Par on Augu

S.a.r.l. to dis

ets.”34 Par st

o disclosed

n June 25, 20

02210/d81655

K, at 37. Covis

”31 The scop

ame.

5, “the Comp

duction of in

neric prescrip

rrently focus

idocaine cre

and. In an SE

equesting do

ic version of

cts.”33 Moreo

ust 6, 2014 “

stribute an au

tated that it c

in public fili

015, Actavis

55d8k.htm.

Pharmaceutica

pe of the

pany receive

nformation a

ption

es on four

am, and

EC Form 10-

ocuments rel

f Covis’s

over, in that

“requesting

uthorized

completed it

ings that the

s received a

als received a s

ed a

and

-K

ated

same

s

ey

similar


subpoena

Company

1

from DO

Doxycyc

received

pricing a

commun

1

subpoena

informati

metformi

about suc

1

executed

significan

must dem

1

from DO

35 All36 My37 Id. 38 My

http://apps2LQZGT&

39 Id.

a from DOJ

y’s generic p

Mylan25.

OJ “seeking i

cline product

a similar sub

nd sale of ce

ications with

More 26.

a to Mylan a

ion relating t

in, Proprano

ch products.”

Signif27.

d” in connect

nt escalation

monstrate “pr

Sun. O28.

OJ “seeking i

lergan, SEC 20

ylan, SEC 2015

ylan SEC Form.shareholder.co

&docid=116784

“seeking inf

products and

n. Mylan sim

nformation r

ts and any co

bpoena from

ertain of the

h competitor

recently, on

and certain em

to the marke

olol and Vera

”38

ficantly, My

tion with DO

n of the DOJ

robable caus

On or about

nformation a

015 Form 10-K

5 Form 10-K, a

m 10-Q, at 58 (Nom/sec/viewer486#MYL10Q

formation rel

d communica

milarly disclo

relating to th

ommunicatio

m the CTAG,

Company’s

rs about such

n November

mployees an

eting, pricing

apamil produ

lan also disc

OJ’s investig

J’s investigat

se.”

May 28, 20

about the pri

K, at F-106.

at 160.

Nov. 10, 2016)Content.aspx?c

Q_20160930XD

- 35 -

lating to the

ations with c

osed in a 20

he marketing

ons with com

, seeking “in

generic pro

h products.”3

10, 2016, M

nd senior ma

g and sale of

ucts and any

closed that “

gation.39 The

tion because

16, Sun disc

icing and ma

), companyid=AB

DOC_HTM_S5

marketing a

competitors a

16 SEC filin

g, pricing, an

mpetitors abo

nformation r

ducts (includ

37

Mylan disclos

anagement “s

f our generic

y communica

[r]elated sea

e issuance of

e to obtain a

closed that it

arketing of t

BEA-582E80BDD42

and pricing o

about such p

ng that it rec

nd sale of ou

out such pro

relating to th

ding Doxycy

sed that DOJ

seeking addi

c Cidofovir,

ations with c

arch warrant

f warrants rep

warrant, the

t had receive

the generic d

215D11A4040

of certain of

products.”35

eived a subp

ur generic

oducts.”36 My

he marketing

ycline) and

J issued a

itional

Glipizide-

competitors

s also were

presents a

e governmen

ed a subpoen

drugs it sells

0D12D4C2E29

f the

poena

ylan

,

nt

na

in

97.


the Unite

commun

1

filing tha

relating t

commun

disclosed

1

of numer

Division

marketin

Pharma a

informati

1

received

seeking d

USA’s ge

same filin

40 Ind

http://fortu41 Id. 42 Dr.43 Ma44 Tev

SECText&JkRTRVE9

ed States.”40

ications with

Dr. R29.

at it had rece

to the marke

ications with

d that it had r

Mayn30.

rous generic

of the US D

ng, pricing an

also disclose

ion.

Teva. 31.

a subpoena

documents a

eneric produ

ng, Teva dis

dia’s Sun Pharmune.com/2016/0

. Reddy’s, SEC

ayne Pharma, 2

va, SEC Form &TEXT=aHR0c9MCZTRVE9

DOJ also so

h competitor

eddy’s. On o

ived a subpo

ting, pricing

h competitor

received a su

ne. In its 201

pharmaceut

Department o

nd sales of se

ed that it had

On August

from the An

and other info

ucts and com

sclosed that o

ma Gets U.S. S05/28/sun-phar

C Form 6-K (A

2016 Annual R

6-K at 25 (AugcDovL2FwaS5MCZTUURFU

ought docum

rs.”41

or about Aug

oena from th

g and sale of

rs about such

ubpoena from

6 Annual Re

tical compan

of Justice [] i

elect generic

d received a s

4, 2016, Tev

ntitrust Divis

formation rel

mmunications

on July 12, 2

Subpoena Overrma-drug-price

Aug. 31, 2016).

Report, at 75.

g. 4, 2016), htt50ZW5rd2l6YXU0M9U0VDV

- 36 -

ments related

gust 11, 2016

he DOJ on Ju

f certain . . . g

h products.”4

m the CTAG

eport, Mayn

nies to receiv

in the last tw

c drugs.”43 In

subpoena fro

va disclosed

sion of the U

lating to the

s with comp

2016, “Teva

r Generic Druge-subpoena.

tp://ir.tevapharXJkLmNvbS9mElPTl9FTlRJU

d to “employ

6, Dr. Reddy

uly 6, 2016,

generic prod

42 In that sam

G concerning

ne Pharma Lt

ve a subpoen

wo years seek

n the same A

om the CTA

d that “[o]n Ju

United States

marketing a

petitors abou

USA receiv

gs Pricing, Fort

rm.com/phoenimaWxpbmcue

UkUmc3Vic2lk

yee and corpo

y’s disclosed

“seeking inf

ducts and any

me filing, Dr

g the same m

td. disclosed

na form the A

king informa

Annual Repo

AG seeking s

une 21, 2015

s Departmen

and pricing o

ut such produ

ved a subpoe

tune (May 28,

ix.zhtml?c=739eG1sP2lwYWdkPTU3.

orate records

d in an SEC

formation

y

r. Reddy’s

matters.

d that it was

Antitrust

ation relating

ort, Mayne

imilar

5, Teva USA

nt of Justice

of certain of

ucts.”44 In th

ena from the

2016),

925&p=irol-dlPTExMDcyO

s and

“one

g to

A

Teva

hat

ODU1


Connecti

state anti

1

two senio

States De

employee

competit

related m

1

subject to

the Zydu

is being i

1

amounts

conduct,

divalproe

Members

45 Id. 46 Tar

SECText&wJkRTRV

47 Ruphttp://timescos/articles

48 Hilhttp://www

icut Attorney

itrust law vio

Taro. 32.

or officers in

epartment of

e records, ge

ors and othe

matters.”46

Zydus33.

o reporting r

us is also a ta

investigated

Durin34.

of divalproe

these purcha

ex ER. The p

s would have

ro, SEC Form &TEXT=aHR0cVE9MCZTRVE

pali Mukherjeesofindia.indiatishow/5530106

llary win may pw.firstpost.com

y General se

olations.”45

On Septemb

n Taro’s com

f Justice, An

eneric pharm

ers regarding

s. Although Z

requirements

arget of the D

in connectio

ng the relevan

ex ER indire

asers have p

prices paid w

e paid absen

6-K (Sept. 9, 2cDovL2FwaS5

E9MCZTUURF

el, US polls, primes.com/busi0.cms.

pose pricing chm/world/hillary-

eeking docum

ber 9, 2016,

mmercial team

ntitrust Divis

maceutical pr

g the sale of g

Zydus is not

s under feder

DOJ’s sweep

on with its m

ANTITR

nt period, Pl

ectly from De

paid, and con

were substan

nt the illegal

2016), http://ph50ZW5rd2l6YXFU0M9U0VDV

ricing pressureiness/india-bus

hallenges for p-win-may-pose

- 37 -

ments and ot

Taro disclos

m, “received

sion, seeking

roducts and p

generic phar

t publicly tra

ral securities

ping investig

marketing an

RUST IMPA

laintiff and C

efendants. A

ntinue to pay

ntially higher

conduct alle

hx.corporate-ir.XJkLmNvbS9mVElPTl9FTlRJ

e may hit Indiainess/US-polls

pharma cos: Ree-pricing-challe

ther informa

sed that on S

d grand jury

g documents

pricing, com

rmaceutical

aded in the U

s laws, recen

gation.47 Acc

nd sale of div

ACT

Class Memb

As a result of

y, artificially

r than the pri

eged in this C

.net/phoenix.zhmaWxpbmcueJUkUmc3Vic2

an pharma cos,s-pricing-press

eport, F. Worldenges-for-phar

ation relating

September 8

subpoenas f

relating to c

mmunication

products, an

United States

nt press repo

cording to on

valproex ER

ers purchase

f Defendants

y inflated pric

ices that Pla

Complaint.

html?c=11469eG1sP2lwYWd2lkPTU3.

, The Times of sure-may-hit-In

d (Nov. 7, 2016rma-cos-report

g to potential

, 2016, it an

from the Uni

corporate an

s with

nd certain oth

s and thus no

orts have stat

ne article, Zy

.48

ed substantia

s’ illegal

ces for

aintiff and Cl

8&p=irol-dlPTExMTM0

f India, ndian-pharma-

6), t-3093544.html

l

nd

ited

d

her

ot

ted

ydus

al

lass

MjU

l.


1

and dama

to date. T

discovery

1

substanti

1

substanti

across sta

conduct h

consume

for divalp

1

forms of

commerc

1

generally

that “[e]v

price at th

overchar

14

industry

49 See50 Id.

As a c35.

age to their b

The full amo

y and upon p

Defen36.

ially affected

At all 37.

ial amounts o

ate and natio

had substant

rs and third-

proex ER.

At all 38.

business com

ce across stat

Econo39.

y results in h

very person a

he top. 49 He

ge that a firm

The in40.

ensures that

e Herbert Hove

consequence

business and

ounts, forms,

proof at trial

ndants’ effor

d interstate c

material tim

of divalproex

onal lines an

tial intrastate

-party payor

times, Defe

mmunication

te and nation

omists recog

higher prices

at every stag

e also says th

m at one dist

nstitutional s

overcharges

enkamp, Feder

e, purchasers

d property in

and compon

.

rts to restrain

commerce—

mes, Defenda

x ER in a co

d throughou

e effects in e

s within each

ndants trans

ns and trans

nal lines in c

gnize that any

at every lev

ge in the cha

hat “[t]heore

tribution lev

structure of p

s at the high

ral Antitrust Po

- 38 -

s of divalpro

n the form of

nents of such

n competition

—and continue

ants manufac

ontinuous an

ut the United

every state of

h state were

smitted funds

actions in a

connection w

y overcharge

vel below. Pr

ain will be po

etically, one

vel will pass

pricing and r

er level of d

olicy: The Law

ex ER have

f overcharge

h damages w

n in the diva

e to do so.

ctured, prom

nd uninterrup

d States. Defe

f purchase b

forced to pa

s and contra

continuous a

with the sale

e at a higher

rofessor Her

oorer” as a r

can calculat

on to those a

regulation in

distribution a

w of Competitio

sustained su

es—and their

will be calcu

alproex ER m

moted, distrib

pted flow of

fendants’ ant

because, amo

ay supracom

acts, invoices

and uninterr

of divalproe

r level of dis

rbert Hovenk

result of the a

te the percen

at the next le

n the pharma

are passed on

on and Its Prac

ubstantial los

r losses cont

ulated after

market have

buted, and so

commerce

ticompetitive

ong other thi

mpetitive pric

s, and other

rupted flow o

ex ER.

tribution

kamp explain

anticompetit

ntage of any

evel.”50

aceutical dru

n to end-pay

ctice, at 564 (19

sses

tinue

old

e

ings,

ces

of

ns

tive

ug

yors.

994).


Wholesa

Members

14

and third

absent D

14

anticomp

14

and conti

Defendan

14

on behalf

injunctiv

14

(b)(3), on

arising fr

lers and reta

s.

Defen41.

d-party payor

efendants’ u

The p42.

petitive cond

The in43.

inue to pay,

nts.

Plaint44.

f of themselv

ve and equita

The I

All pepurchpurchby itsebenefiincludcondu

Plaint45.

n behalf of th

rom Defenda

The D

ailers passed

ndants’ antic

rs prices in e

unlawful acti

rices were in

duct.

nflated price

are traceable

tiff brings th

ves and a na

able relief:

njunctive C

ersons or entased, paid, aase price forelf, its famil

ficiaries, fromding the dateuct ceased.

tiff also bring

hemselves an

ants’ conduc

Damages Cl

on the inflat

ompetitive c

excess of wh

ions.

nflated as a d

es that Plaint

e to and the

CLASS A

is action as a

ationwide cla

Class:

tities in the Uand providedr divalproex ies, or its me

m at least as e that the ant

gs this action

nd a class of

ct as describe

ass:

- 39 -

ted prices of

conduct enab

hat they othe

direct and fo

iff and Class

foreseeable

ALLEGATI

a class action

ass of similar

United Statesd reimbursemER, other th

embers, empearly as Oct

ticompetitive

n as a class a

f similarly si

ed below:

f divalproex

bled Defend

erwise would

oreseeable re

s Members h

result of, the

IONS

n, under Fed

rly situated i

s and its terrment for somhan for resalployees, insutober 1, 2013e effects of D

action, unde

ituated indiv

ER to Plain

dants to charg

d have been

esult of Defe

have paid fo

e overcharge

d. R. Civ. P.

individuals s

ritories who me or all of thle, for consumureds, partici3 through anDefendants’

er Fed. R. Civ

viduals seeki

ntiff and Clas

ge consumer

able to charg

endants’

r divalproex

es caused by

23(a) and (b

seeking

indirectly he mption ipants, or nd unlawful

v. P. 23(a) a

ing damages

ss

rs

ge

x ER,

y

b)(2),

and

s


14

Classes:

em

b

o

an

m

fo

fa

14

believes

All pereimbother membas earanticothe foCalifoMichiYork,DakotDistri

The fo46.

mployees, su

enefit plans;

f resale or di

nother third-

members);

or brand and

amilies.

Memb47.

that there ar

ersons or entursement fothan for resa

bers, employrly as Octobeompetitive efllowing state

ornia, Floridaigan, Minnes North Carota, Tennessect of Columb

ollowing per

(a) De

ubsidiaries, o

(b) All

;

(c) All

irectly from

(d) Fu

-party payor

(e) Fla

d generic dru

(f) Th

bers of the C

re thousands

tities who inr some or alale, for consuyees, insureder 1, 2013 thffects of Defes, commonwa, Hawaii, Iosota, Mississlina, North D

ee, Utah, Verbia.

rsons and en

efendants and

or affiliates;

l governmen

l persons or

Defendants

lly-insured h

covering 10

at co-payers

ugs); and

he judges in t

Classes are so

of members

- 40 -

directly purcl of the purcumption by

ds, participanhrough and infendants’ unwealths, andowa, Kansassippi, NebrasDakota, Oregrmont, West

ntities are exc

d their couns

ntal entities,

entities who

or their affi

health plans

00% of the p

(consumers

this case and

o numerous

s of each cla

chased, paidchase price foitself, its fam

nts, or benefincluding the

nlawful condd territories: s, Massachusska, Nevadagon, Rhode t Virginia, W

cluded from

sel, officers,

except for g

o purchased

liates;

(plans that p

plan’s reimbu

who paid th

d any membe

that joinder

ss.

d, and providfor: divalproemilies, or its ficiaries, frome date that thduct ceased, i

Alabama, Asetts, Mainea, New MexiIsland, Sout

Wisconsin, an

m the above-d

, directors, m

government-f

divalproex E

purchased in

ursement ob

he same co-p

ers of their i

is impractic

ded ex ER,

m at least he in any of

Arizona, , ico, New th nd the

described

management,

funded empl

ER for purpo

nsurance from

bligations to

payment amo

mmediate

cable. Plainti

,

loyee

oses

m

its

ount

iff


14

and mem

they paid

conduct—

14

Classes.

the Class

1

action an

pharmace

1

over que

acted on

Class.

1

th

w

d

Plaint48.

mbers of the C

d artificially

—and contin

Plaint49.

Plaintiff’s in

ses.

Plaint50.

ntitrust litigat

eutical produ

Quest51.

stions that m

grounds gen

Quest52.

he prices of d

with respect t

ivalproex ER

tiff’s claims

Classes were

inflated pric

nue to do so.

tiff will fairly

nterests are c

tiff is represe

tion, and wit

ucts.

tions of law a

may affect on

nerally appli

tions of law a

(a) the

(b) wh

divalproex E

(c) wh

to divalproex

(d) wh

R market;

are typical o

e damaged b

ces for divalp

y and adequ

coincident w

ented by cou

th experienc

and fact com

nly individua

cable to each

and fact com

e identity of

hether Defen

ER;

hether Defen

x ER;

hether Defen

- 41 -

of the claims

by the same w

proex ER as

ately protect

with, and not

unsel with ex

ce in class ac

mmon to the

al members o

h member of

mmon to mem

the participa

ndants consp

ndants consp

ndants’ condu

s of the mem

wrongful co

a result of D

t and represe

antagonistic

xperience in

ction antitrus

members of

of the Classe

f the Injunct

mbers of bot

ants in the co

ired to fix, r

ired to alloc

uct harmed c

mbers of the C

nduct by De

Defendants’

ent the intere

c to, those of

the prosecut

st litigation i

f the Classes

es because D

tive Class an

th Classes in

onspiracy;

raise, mainta

cate markets

competition

Classes. Plai

efendants in

wrongful

ests of the

f the membe

tion of class

involving

s predominat

Defendants h

nd Damages

nclude:

ain, and stabi

or customer

in the

intiff

that

ers of

s

te

have

ilize

rs


af

in

ov

C

re

1

of the con

geograph

simultane

expense t

the class

redress o

potential

1

preclude

1

ffected inter

njury to the b

vercharges;

Classes in the

estraint and t

Class 53.

ntroversy. S

hically dispe

eously, effic

that numerou

mechanism,

on claims tha

difficulties

Plaint54.

its maintena

(By Plai

Plaint55.

(e) wh

rstate and int

(f) wh

business or p

(g) the

e aggregate;

(h) the

to restore co

action treatm

uch treatmen

rsed persons

ciently, and w

us individua

, including p

at could not p

in managem

tiff knows of

ance as a cla

F

Violatiintiff and In

tiff incorpora

hether Defen

trastate comm

hether, and to

property of P

e amount of o

and

e injunctive a

ompetition in

ment is a sup

nt will perm

s or entities t

without the u

al actions wo

providing inj

practicably b

ment of this c

f no special d

ass action.

CLAIMS

FIRST CLA

ion of Shermnjunctive Cl

ates the prec

- 42 -

ndants’ activi

merce;

o what exten

Plaintiff and

overcharges

and other eq

n the divalpro

perior metho

mit a large nu

to prosecute

unnecessary

ould engende

jured person

be pursued in

class action.

difficulty to

S FOR REL

AIM FOR R

man Act § 1lass Membe

ceding parag

ities alleged

nt, Defendan

members of

s paid by Pla

quitable relie

roex ER mar

od for the fai

umber of sim

their comm

duplication

er. The bene

ns or entities

ndividually,

be encounte

LIEF

RELIEF

1, 15 U.S.C. ers Against A

graphs by ref

d herein have

nts’ conduct

f the Classes

aintiff and m

ef needed to

rket.

ir and efficie

milarly situate

mon claims in

of evidence

efits of proce

a method fo

substantiall

ered in this a

§ 1 All Defenda

ference.

e substantiall

caused antit

s in the natur

members of th

end Defenda

ent adjudicat

ed,

n a single for

e, effort, or

eeding throu

or obtaining

ly outweighs

action that w

ants)

ly

trust

re of

he

ants’

tion

rum

gh

s any

would


1

anticomp

allocate m

1

Injunctiv

1

market al

Act. By t

unreason

unreason

inflated p

1

suffer ha

Defendan

Injunctiv

alleged in

1

divalproe

1

Federal R

Section 1

1

including

Defen56.

petitive schem

markets and

Had D57.

ve Class Mem

Defen58.

llocation for

their agreem

nable restrain

nable restrain

prices for div

Plaint59.

rm, as a resu

nts’ anticom

ve Class Mem

n this Comp

Plaint60.

ex ER indire

Plaint61.

Rule of Civil

1 of the Sher

Plaint62.

g disgorgeme

ndants knowi

me to fix, ra

customers f

Defendants c

mbers would

ndants intend

r divalproex

ment, Defend

nt of trade in

nt on compet

valproex ER

tiff and Injun

ult of paying

mpetitive con

mbers also fa

laint.

tiff and Injun

ectly from D

tiff and Injun

l Procedure

rman Act.

tiff and Injun

ent of profit

ingly, intent

aise, maintain

for divalproe

competed ins

d have paid s

ded, and acco

ER, which a

ants intentio

n violation of

tition, Plaint

R—and conti

nctive Class

g higher price

duct and con

ace a continu

nctive Class

efendants.

nctive Class

57 and 28 U

nctive Class

s, pursuant t

- 43 -

tionally, and

n, and stabil

ex ER—and

stead of cons

substantially

omplished, a

are per se vio

onally and w

f Section 1 o

tiff and Injun

nue to do so

Members ha

es for divalp

ntinuing anti

uing threat o

Members ha

Members se

U.S.C. § 2201

Members al

to Section 16

d cooperative

lize the price

continue to

spiring to re

y lower price

a price-fixin

olations of S

wrongfully co

of the Sherm

nctive Class

o.

ave suffered

proex ER tha

icompetitive

of injury from

ave purchase

eek a declara

1(a) that Def

lso seek equi

6 of the Clay

ely engaged

es of divalpro

do so.

strain trade,

es for divalpr

ng conspiracy

Section 1 of

onspired and

man Act. As a

Members pa

d harm, and a

an they woul

e agreements

m the unlaw

ed substantia

atory judgme

fendants’ co

itable and in

yton Act, 15

in an

oex ER, and

Plaintiff and

roex ER.

y and horizo

the Sherman

d combined i

a result of th

aid artificial

are continuin

ld have abse

s. Plaintiff an

wful conduct

al amounts o

ent pursuant

nduct violat

njunctive reli

U.S.C. § 26

d

d

ontal

n

in an

his

lly

ng to

ent

nd

of

t to

tes

ief,

6, and


other app

unlawful

does not

1

1

anticomp

allocate m

1

the mann

1

relevant m

1

agreemen

laws.

1

of the sta

supracom

continue

1

m

plicable law,

l conduct, an

reoccur in th

(By Pla

Plaint63.

Defen64.

petitive schem

markets and

Defen65.

ner explained

Defen66.

market to ha

Defen67.

nts between

Defen68.

ates listed be

mpetitively p

to do so.

Defen69.

members of th

, to correct fo

nd other relie

he future.

SE

aintiff and D

tiff incorpora

ndants knowi

me to fix, ra

customers f

ndants’ unlaw

d above.

ndants’ unlaw

arm competit

ndants’ actio

actual and p

ndants’ supra

elow in that e

priced divalp

ndants’ cond

(a) Ala

he Damages

for the antico

ef to ensure t

ECOND CL

State AntDamages Cla

ates the prec

ingly, intent

aise, maintain

for divalproe

wful conduct

wful conduct

tion.

ns constitute

potential com

acompetitive

each purchas

proex ER cau

duct violated

a. Code § 6-

s Class;

- 44 -

ompetitive m

that the same

LAIM FOR

titrust Violaass Member

ceding parag

tionally, and

n, and stabil

ex ER—and

t harmed Pla

t covered a s

e horizontal

mpetitors and

e pricing con

se by Plainti

used injury t

the followin

-5-60, with r

market effect

e or similar

R RELIEF

ations rs Against A

graphs by ref

d cooperative

lize the price

continue to

aintiff and D

sufficiently s

market alloc

d are illegal p

nstitute a con

iff or a mem

to their busin

ng state laws

respect to pu

s caused by

anticompetit

All Defenda

ference.

ely engaged

es of divalpro

do so.

Damages Cla

substantial p

cation and pr

per se under

ntinuing viol

mber of the D

ness or prope

s:

urchases in A

Defendants’

tive conduct

ants)

in an

oex ER and

ass Members

percentage o

rice-fixing

r state antitru

lation of the

Damages Clas

erty—and

Alabama by

’

t

s in

f the

ust

laws

ss of


- 45 -

(b) Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 44-1401, et seq., with respect to purchases in

Arizona by members of the Damages Class;

(c) Cal. Bus. Code §§ 16700, et seq., and Cal. Bus. Code §§ 17200, et

seq., with respect to purchases in California by members of the Damages Class;

(d) D.C. Code Ann. §§ 28-4501, et seq., with respect to purchases in

the District of Columbia by members of the Damages Class;

(e) Fla. Stat. §§ 501.201, et seq., with respect to purchases in Florida

by members of the Damages Class;

(f) Hawaii Code § 480, et seq., with respect to purchases in Hawaii by

members of the Damages Class;

(g) Iowa Code §§ 553 et seq., with respect to purchases in Iowa by

members of the Damages Class;

(h) Kan. Stat. Ann. §§ 50-101, et seq., with respect to purchases in

Kansas by members of the Damages Class;

(i) Mass. Gen. L. Ch. 93A, et seq., with respect to purchases in

Massachusetts by members of the Damages Class;

(j) Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. 10, §§ 1101, et seq., with respect to purchases

in Maine by members of the Damages Class;

(k) Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. §§ 445.772, et seq., with respect to

purchases in Michigan by members of the Damages Class;

(l) Minn. Stat. §§ 325D.49, et seq., with respect to purchases in

Minnesota by members of the Damages Class;


- 46 -

(m) Miss. Code Ann. §§ 75-21-1, et seq., with respect to purchases in

Mississippi by members of the Damages Class;

(n) Neb. Code Ann. §§ 59-801, et seq., with respect to purchases in

Nebraska by members of the Damages Class;

(o) Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 598A, et seq., with respect to purchases in

Nevada by members of the Damages Class;

(p) N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 57-1-1, et seq., with respect to purchases in

New Mexico by members of the Damages Class;

(q) N.Y. Gen. Bus. L. §§ 340, et seq., with respect to purchases in

New York by members of the Damages Class;

(r) N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 75-1, et seq., with respect to purchases in North

Carolina by members of the Damages Class;

(s) N.D. Cent. Code §§ 51-08.1-01, et seq., with respect to purchases

in North Dakota by members of the Damages Class;

(t) Or. Rev. Stat. §§ 6.46.705, et seq., with respect to purchases in

Oregon by members of the Damages Class;

(u) R.I. Gen. Laws §§ 6-36-1 et seq., with respect to purchases in

Rhode Island by members of the Damages Class;

(v) S.D. Codified Laws Ann. §§ 37-1, et seq., with respect to

purchases in South Dakota by members of the Damages Class;

(w) Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 47-25-101, et seq., with respect to purchases

in Tennessee by members of the Damages Class;


in

V

V

W

1

their busi

denied fr

paying hi

wrongful

prevent,

1

permitted

conduct.

1

and Dam

1

practices

n Utah by me

Vermont by m

Virginia by m

Wisconsin by

Plaint70.

iness or prop

ree and open

igher prices

l conduct. Th

and flow fro

Plaint71.

d by law for

Defen72.

mages Class M

Defen73.

in violation

(x) Uta

embers of th

(y) Vt

members of t

(z) W.

members of t

(aa) Wi

y members o

tiff and Dam

perty by Def

n competition

for divalpro

hese injuries

om that whic

tiff and Dam

the injuries

ndants are jo

Members.

ndants have e

n of the abov

ah Code Ann

he Damages

. Stat. Ann. 9

the Damage

.Va. Code §§

the Damages

is. Stat. §§ 1

of the Damag

mages Class M

fendants’ ant

n between co

oex ER than

s are of the ty

ch makes De

mages Class M

they suffere

intly and sev

engaged in u

ve-listed state

- 47 -

n. §§ 76-10-

Class;

9, §§ 2453, e

s Class;

§ 47-18-3, e

s Class; and

33.03, et seq

ges Class.

Members hav

titrust violat

ompetitors in

they would h

ype the abov

efendants’ co

Members see

ed as a result

verally liable

unfair compe

e antitrust la

-3101, et seq

et seq., with

t seq., with r

q., with resp

ave been and

tions. Their i

n the market

have paid in

ve antitrust l

onduct unlaw

ek damages

t of Defenda

e for all dam

etition or unf

aws.

q., with respe

h respect to p

respect to pu

pect to purch

d continue to

injuries cons

ts for divalpr

n the absence

laws were de

wful.

and multiple

ants’ anticom

mages suffere

fair or decep

ect to purcha

purchases in

urchases in W

hases in

be injured i

sist of: (1) be

roex ER; and

e of Defenda

esigned to

e damages a

mpetitive

ed by Plainti

ptive acts or

ases

West

in

eing

d (2)

ants’

as

iff


1

1

in this Co

1

of divalp

1

Members

1

economic

to the eco

1

from any

considera

Damages

1

any reme

indirectly

compens

1

artificiall

unlawful

(By Pla

Plaint74.

To the75.

omplaint.

Defen76.

proex ER ma

Defen77.

s’ overpaym

Plaint78.

c benefit upo

onomic detri

It wou79.

y party with w

ation to anyo

s Class Mem

It wou80.

edy against t

y purchased

ate Plaintiff

The ec81.

ly inflated pr

l practices.

T

aintiff and D

tiff incorpora

e extent requ

ndants have b

ade possible

ndants’ finan

ments for diva

tiff and Dam

on Defendan

iment of Pla

uld be futile

whom they h

one for any o

mbers.

uld be futile

he immediat

divalproex E

f and Damag

conomic ben

rices for div

THIRD CLA

UnjusDamages Cla

ates the prec

uired, this cla

benefited an

by the unlaw

ncial benefits

alproex ER.

mages Class M

nts in the nat

aintiff and Da

for Plaintiff

had or have

of the benefi

for Plaintiff

te intermedia

ER as those

es Class Me

nefit Defend

alproex ER

- 48 -

AIM FOR R

st Enrichmeass Member

ceding parag

aim is plead

nd continue t

wful and ineq

s are traceab

Members hav

ture of profit

amages Clas

f and Damag

privity of co

its they recei

f and Damag

ary in the ch

intermediari

embers for D

dants derived

is a direct an

RELIEF

ent rs Against A

graphs by ref

ded in the alte

o benefit fro

quitable acts

ble to Plaintif

ave conferred

ts resulting f

ss Members.

ges Class Me

ontract. Defe

ived indirect

ges Class Me

hain of distri

ies are not li

Defendants’ u

d from charg

nd proximate

All Defenda

ference.

ernative to th

om the overc

s alleged in t

ff’s and Dam

d and continu

from unlawf

.

embers to se

endants have

tly from Plai

embers to se

ibution from

iable and wo

unlawful con

ging monopo

e result of D

ants)

he other clai

charges on sa

this Compla

mages Class

ue to confer

ful overcharg

ek a remedy

e paid no

intiff and

ek to exhaus

m which they

ould not

nduct.

olistic and

Defendants’

ims

ales

int.

an

ges,

y

st


1

Damages

Defendan

1

of the sta

overchar

from Def

1

Plaintiff

1

they rece

1

Defendan

1

A

judgment

A

Rule of C

given to m

represent

B

other stat

C

The fi82.

s Class Mem

nts’ benefit.

It wou83.

ates in the Un

ges Plaintiff

fendants’ un

Defen84.

and the Dam

Defen85.

eived in a com

A con86.

nts received

Plaint87.

Accordingly,

t that:

A. Determ

Civil Procedu

members of

tative of the

B. Decla

te statutes se

C. Enjoin

inancial bene

mbers, who p

uld be inequi

nited States

f and Damag

nfair and unc

ndants are aw

mages Class.

ndants should

mmon fund

nstructive tru

that are trac

tiff and Dam

Plaintiff, on

mines that th

ure 23(a), (b

f the Classes

Classes;

ares that Defe

et forth abov

ns Defendan

efits Defend

paid, and con

itable under

and the Dist

ges Class Me

onscionable

ware of and a

d be compel

for the bene

ust should be

ceable to Pla

mages Class M

DEMAND

n its own beh

his case may

b)(2), and (b)

under Rule

fendants’ con

ve, and the co

nts from cont

- 49 -

dants derived

ntinue to pay

unjust enric

trict of Colum

embers paid

e methods, ac

appreciate th

led to disgor

efit of Plainti

e imposed up

intiff and Da

Members hav

FOR JUDG

half and on b

y be maintain

)(3), directs

23(c)(2), an

nduct violate

ommon law

tinuing their

d rightfully b

y, anticompe

chment princ

mbia for De

for divalpro

cts, and trad

he benefits b

rge all unlaw

iff and Dam

pon all unlaw

amages Clas

ave no adequ

GMENT

behalf of the

ned as a clas

that reasona

nd declares th

ed Section 1

of unjust en

r illegal activ

belong to Pla

etitive prices

ciples under

efendants to r

oex ER that w

de practices.

bestowed upo

wful or inequ

ages Class M

wful or inequ

ss Members.

uate remedy

e proposed C

ss action pur

able notice o

hat Plaintiff

of the Sherm

nrichment;

vities;

aintiff and

that inured

the laws of

retain any of

were derived

on them by

uitable proce

Members.

uitable sums

.

at law.

Classes, dem

rsuant to Fed

of this case b

is a proper

man Act, the

to

each

f the

d

eeds

s

ands

deral

e

e


- 50 -

D. Enters judgment against Defendants joint and severally and in favor of Plaintiff

and the Classes;

E. Grants Plaintiff and the Injunctive Class equitable relief in the nature of

disgorgement, restitution, and the creation of a constructive trust to remedy Defendants’ unjust

enrichment;

F. Awards the Plaintiff and the Damages Class damages and, where applicable,

treble, multiple, punitive, and other damages, in an amount to be determined at trial, including

interest;

G. Awards Plaintiff and the Classes their costs of suit, including reasonable

attorneys’ fees as provided by law; and

H. Grants further relief as necessary to correct for the anticompetitive market effects

caused by Defendants’ unlawful conduct, as the Court deems just.



Documents

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTT EASTERN DISTRICT OF …€¦ · ORATORIE NC., MYLA LS INC., PA L, INC., PA L COMPAN EUTICALS dants. iff UFCW L ngs this cla obtain injun ted have sus