In a massive case, in which states are suing makers of generic drugs over an alleged price-fixing scheme, score one for the states and one for the drugmakers.
On Tuesday, a federal district court judge in Pennsylvania ruled (PDF) that states were not entitled to a cut of the profits generics manufacturers allegedly made from their scheme.
Judge Cynthia Rufe said that disgorgement was not an available avenue for the states to pursue under federal antitrust laws.
But it wasn’t a complete victory for the drugmakers. Rufe also rejected the companies’ attempt to dismiss the states’ effort to score injunctive relief, which would allow the court to intervene in their operations.
In the sweeping action, which involves 49 states, 20 companies and more than a dozen drugs, the plaintiffs allege that the drug producers have engaged in an “overarching conspiracy” to limit competition.
This action is part of a broader, multidistrict antitrust suit that alleges the companies worked together to stabilize prices, rig bids and limit the availability of certain generic drugs.
Most of the world’s prolific makers of generics are named in the case including Teva, Sandoz, Par Pharmaceuticals and Mylan (now Viatris).
Another lawsuit, filed in 2018 by 51 states and territories and focused on more than 80 dermatological medicines, claims that 26 generics companies and 10 individuals worked to fix price