Union health funds alleging that AstraZeneca paid generic drugmakers not to challenge its Nexium patents were properly certified as a class, the First Circuit ruled on Monday.
According to reports, while the jury found that AstraZeneca had made unjustified payments to Ranbaxy to delay the release of a generic form of a competitive drug, the jury said those payments were not unreasonably anticompetitive because no competing Union health funds alleging that AstraZeneca paid generic drugmakers not to challenge its Nexium patents were properly certified as a class, the 1st Circuit ruled.
The deal has kept any generic substitute for Nexium from reaching the market even though AstraZeneca’s patents expired in May 2014.
The First Circuit affirmed class-action status for the case last week, despite claims that the lack of a generic alternative has not injured all class members.
Full Content: Courthouse News Service
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
US Consumer Watchdog Eyes Expansion of ‘Junk Fee’ Crackdown Ahead of 2024 Election
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
Brazil Proposes Reform to Competition Law Targeting Big Tech
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
Meta Enhances User Data Control, Resolving German Antitrust Dispute
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
X May Be Excluded from EU’s Strict Tech Rules, Sources Suggest
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
G7 Targets Competitive Imbalances in Semiconductor Industry
Oct 10, 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