In re Lidoderm Antitrust Litigation

Track this case

Case overview

Case Number:

3:14-md-02521

Court:

California Northern

Nature of Suit:

Anti-Trust

Multi Party Litigation:

Class Action, Multi-district Litigation

Judge:

William H. Orrick

Firms

Companies

Government Agencies

Sectors & Industries:

  1. May 11, 2015

    Endo Slams Walgreens' Lidoderm Pay-For-Delay Suit

    Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. asked a California federal court Friday to ax Walgreens Boots Alliance Inc. and Kroger Co.'s lawsuit, saying because they didn't buy the pain patch directly from the drugmaker, they couldn't challenge its Lidoderm patent settlements.

  2. May 05, 2015

    Dozens Of State Law Claims Sliced From Lidoderm MDL

    A California federal judge on Tuesday pared some state antitrust and consumer protection claims from multidistrict litigation lodged against Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and two other pharmaceutical companies over an alleged pay-for-delay deal for the pain medication Lidoderm while letting others proceed.

  3. April 21, 2015

    Rite Aid Wants To Join Lidoderm Patch Antitrust Battle

    Rite Aid Corp. on Tuesday moved to be the latest pharmacy to try entering the Lidoderm pay-for-delay multidistrict litigation in California federal court, alleging that Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Teikoku Seiyaku Co. Ltd. paid at least $266 million to delay generic versions of the pain patch.

  4. March 05, 2015

    Walgreens, Safeway Want To Join Lidoderm MDL

    Walgreens Co., The Kroger Co. and other grocery stores sought to enter the Lidoderm pay-for-delay multidistrict litigation in California federal court, accusing Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Teikoku Seiyaku Co. Ltd. of paying at least $266 million to delay generic versions of the pain patch.

  5. February 03, 2015

    Endo, Others Look To Pare State Claims In Lidoderm MDL

    Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and two other drugmakers have pushed a California federal court overseeing the Lidoderm multidistrict litigation to pare down state antitrust claims from updated complaints end payors and the Government Employees Health Association filed over an alleged pay-for-delay deal for the pain medication.

  6. November 18, 2014

    CORRECTED: Pharmas Can't Nix Lidoderm MDL Over $170M Pay-For-Delay Deals

    A California federal judge on Tuesday preserved the bulk of consolidated antitrust multidistrict litigation accusing Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc., Teikoku Seiyaku Co. Ltd., and Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc. of illegally deferring competition from Watson’s planned Lidoderm generic by giving Watson pharmaceuticals and promises of product delays worth $170 million. (Correction: An earlier story didn’t clearly explain that the main federal antitrust claims against the defendants are moving forward. The error has been corrected.)

  7. November 05, 2014

    Endo, Teikoku Monopoly Claims Likely Out In Lidoderm MDL

    A California federal judge said Wednesday he would likely throw out allegations in multidistrict litigation that Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Teikoku Seiyaku Co., Ltd. shared a monopoly in the market for the Lidoderm pain-relief patch, saying only one entity can be accused of holding a monopoly.  

  8. September 09, 2014

    Lidoderm Buyers Fight Dismissal Bid In Pay-For-Delay Suit

    Consumers and others who bought Lidoderm pain patches hit back Monday at a bid by Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and other drugmakers to dismiss multidistrict litigation accusing them of using a patent settlement to delay a generic version of the treatment.

  9. July 29, 2014

    Endo, Watson Seek Dismissal Of Lidoderm Pay-For-Delay Suits

    Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc., Teikoku Seiyaku Co. Ltd. and Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc. urged a California federal judge on Monday to dismiss several suits in multidistrict litigation accusing them of illegally agreeing to delay a generic version of the Lidoderm pain relief patch, arguing the deal was perfectly lawful.