Three major drugmakers persuaded a federal judge to drop antitrust claims in a case accusing them of overcharging for insulin while paying insurers kickbacks, but organized crime allegations are moving forward in court, reported Bloomberg.
Claims under the federal racketeering law can proceed against Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi-Aventis because the plaintiffs plausibly alleged schemes of unlawful bribery and mail and wire fraud, which are predicate offenses covered under that law, Judge Brian R. Martinotti of the US District Court for the District of New Jersey wrote in an unpublished opinion.
Express Scripts, CVS Health, and UnitedHealth Group—pharmacy benefit managers which help decide how a drug will be covered by insurance—are also defendants in the case and failed to evade the racketeering claims as well, according to the July 9 opinion.
The decision came the same day President Joe Biden issued an executive order aimed at deterring anticompetitive conduct and driving down prescription drug prices. Democratic lawmakers have been pushing for legislation that would direct the government to negotiate the price of insulin and other pharmaceutical products.
Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi are accused in the lawsuit of inflating the official list price of insulin while the actual prices negotiated by pharmacy benefit managers remained flat due to massive rebates from drug companies.
The lawsuit, brought by drug distributors including FWK Holdings, alleges that those companies use the widening spread between insulin’s list and market prices as cover for the rebates because insurers reimburse PBMs based on a drug’s list price.
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Rio Tinto to Acquire U.S.-Based Arcadium Lithium in $6.7 Billion Deal
Oct 9, 2024 by
CPI
Biden Administration Warns of Price Gouging Risks Ahead of Hurricane Milton’s Landfall
Oct 9, 2024 by
CPI
Cleveland-Cliffs Clears Regulatory Hurdle in Stelco Acquisition
Oct 9, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Showdown: Google Confronts Threats to Its Business in App Distribution, Search, and Advertising
Oct 9, 2024 by
CPI
X Returns to Brazil After Supreme Court Ruling Clears Path
Oct 9, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh