Walgreens and three other pharmacy chains are suing drugmaker Bausch Health, its subsidiaries, and a separate generic drugmaker for allegedly colluding on a deal that allowed the brand-name companies to maintain a longer monopoly of the diabetes drug Glumetza.
According to Reuters, the alleged deal resulted in those companies jacking up the price of the drug from US$350 to more than US$3,000 for a 30-day supply.
The lawsuit, filed on Monday, December 2, alleges that Assertio and Lupin struck a deal with units of Bausch to delay the entry of their generic versions of Glumetza and allowed the companies to “maintain a monopoly” in the sale of the branded drug and its generic copies.
Albertson Companies and Kroger were among the other defendants.
Full Content: Reuters
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Pork Industry Faces Legal Challenges as Antitrust Lawsuits Against Seaboard Foods Dismissed
Oct 2, 2024 by
CPI
CMA Strengthens Investigation with Advisory Panel of Veterinary Experts
Oct 2, 2024 by
CPI
US Merchants Sue Visa, Alleging Unfair Dominance in Debit Card Market
Oct 2, 2024 by
CPI
European Commission Appoints New Chief Competition Economist
Oct 2, 2024 by
CPI
EU Commission Requests Information from YouTube, Snapchat, TikTok on Algorithm Usage
Oct 2, 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