Overview
On December 9, 2020, the Honorable Allison D. Burroughs of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts granted final approval of a $19.9 million settlement between a certified class of direct purchasers of Intuniv, an attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medication, and Actavis, the pharmaceutical manufacturer of Intuniv. Plaintiffs allege that the Actavis, along with fellow pharmaceutical manufacturer Shire, conspired to delay competition for generic versions of Intuniv, causing the direct purchasers to pay an inflated price for Intuniv. Claims against Shire have not yet been resolved.
The Court certified the class of direct purchasers of Intuniv or its generic equivalent on September 24, 2019.
Cohen Milstein played a significant role in representing the Direct Purchaser Class.
Case Background
In April 2013, Shire and Actavis entered into an alleged unlawful reverse payment agreement under which Actavis agreed to delay the entry of its ANDA-approved generic Intuniv until December 1, 2014, and, in return, Shire guaranteed Actavis a 180-day exclusivity period when it entered the market. , an agreement worth hundreds of millions of dollars in sales to Shire and approximately millions in profits to Actavis.
Such reverse payment arrangements are unlawful because they block generic competition from entering the market, enabling competitors to unlawfully share monopoly profits between themselves, ultimately harming consumers. Absent this agreement between Shire and Actavis, Plaintiffs claim that that less expensive generic versions of Intuniv would have come to market earlier and purchasers would have saved hundreds of millions of dollars.
Plaintiffs seek treble damages arising out of the Defendants’ unlawful impairment of competition for the drug Intuniv.