Nexium found that AstraZeneca had violated the antitrust laws by acting to keep generics off the market but that no generic would have been introduced earlier in the market even without the violation. Thus, the jury found that the plaintiffs were not entitled to relief. Though the defendants have yet to file a response, they will likely argue the plaintiffs cannot show a threatened injury.
Featured News
Zillow Sues Compass and Chicago’s MLS Over Private Listings Dispute
May 12, 2026 by
CPI
Paramount Tells California Officials Proposed Warner Bros. Discovery Deal Would Strengthen Theater Business
May 12, 2026 by
CPI
Small Canadian Tech Firm Mounts Global Antitrust Fight Against Apple After App Removal
May 12, 2026 by
CPI
Award-Winning Journalists and Narrators Sue Google Over Alleged Voice AI Training
May 12, 2026 by
CPI
Lawmakers Look to Public Health Framework for Regulating Social Media
May 12, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Unilateral Effects
Apr 28, 2026 by
CPI
A Net Present Value Approach to Merger Analysis
Apr 28, 2026 by
Joseph J Simons & Malcolm Coate
Generative AI and Competitive Disruption: Increasingly Relevant for Merger Analysis?
Apr 28, 2026 by
Andrea Coscelli, Emily Chissell, Nitika Bagaria & Tega Akati-Udi
Non-Price Unilateral Effects In Media Mergers
Apr 28, 2026 by
Lapo Filistrucchi & Teresa Oriani
Ecosystem Mergers and Unilateral Effects? A Framework for Assessing the Ecosystem Theory of Harm
Apr 28, 2026 by
Ethel Fonseca, George Tucker & Helder Vasconcelos