Current Cases

In re Intuniv Antitrust Litigation

Status Current Case

Practice area Antitrust

Court U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts

Case number 16-cv-12653-ADB

Overview

On July 2, 2024, the Honorable Allison D. Burroughs of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts granted preliminary approval of a $58 million settlement between a certified class direct purchasers and Shire after seven-and-a-half years of hard-fought litigation. The settlement follows a $19.9 million settlement between a certified class of direct purchasers and Actavis, which was granted final approval by the court on December 9, 2020. Pending final approval, total settlements for the direct purchaser class will come to $80 million.

Cohen Milstein plays a significant role in representing the Direct Purchaser Class.

Case Background

Plaintiffs allege that 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.