In re: Generic Pharmaceuticals MDL 2724 Pricing Antitrust Litigation

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania addresses eleven motions by Epic Pharma LLC to dismiss amended complaints alleging antitrust and state-law violations involving the pricing and distribution of generic Ursodiol. The court holds that eight complaints sufficiently allege Epic’s participation in a conspiracy with Lannett and Actavis, while three complaints lack sufficient allegations of Epic’s participation. The motions to dismiss are denied as to eight actions and granted as to the HCSC, Molina, and CVS actions.

Holdings

1. Eight complaints plausibly alleged that Epic conspired with Lannett and Actavis to raise and control the price of Ursodiol. Allegations of parallel price increases, communications among the alleged conspirators, market conditions supporting collusion, a common motive, conduct against self-interest, and other conspiracy plus factors were sufficient to survive Rule 12(b)(6).
2. The state-law claims in the eight complaints survived dismissal because they rose or fell with the federal antitrust allegations, and the federal allegations were sufficient to state actionable claims.
3. The HCSC, Molina, and CVS complaints failed to state claims against Epic because they did not identify specific conduct by Epic showing that it joined or participated in an anticompetitive conspiracy.

Questions Presented

1. Whether eight amended complaints plausibly alleged that Epic participated in a conspiracy with Lannett and Actavis to raise and control the price of Ursodiol.
2. Whether the HCSC, Molina, and CVS amended complaints alleged sufficient facts identifying specific conduct by Epic and plausibly showing that Epic joined an antitrust conspiracy.
3. Whether the state-law claims, which depended on the sufficiency of the federal antitrust allegations, survived when the underlying antitrust allegations were sufficient.

Disposition

other