By Jonathan Stempel
(Reuters) -A federal judge on Friday said 36 drugmakers and executives must face nearly all claims in an antitrust lawsuit brought by most U.S. states, accusing them of conspiring to fix prices of 80 generic drugs.
Chief Judge Michael Shea of the federal district court in Connecticut rejected claims that 45 states, the District of Columbia and four U.S. territories waited an unreasonably long time to pursue federal antitrust claims, and missed formal deadlines to file similar claims under state laws.
Led by Connecticut, the states accused drugmakers including Pfizer, Perrigo and Sandoz of conspiring to raise prices, limit competition and allocate customers for drugs, primarily for skin ailments, between 2009 and 2016.
In a 130-page decision, Shea said the defendants failed to show that the states “lacked diligence” in pursuing their case, citing evidence that the defendants pursued “affirmative acts” to conceal their alleged collusion.
“A reasonable juror could find that the defendants’ ‘blaming supply,’ making uncompetitively high bids, and falsely citing production costs for increased prices were aimed at concealing their alleged conspiracy,” the Hartford-based judge wrote.
Lawyers for Pfizer, Perrigo and Sandoz did not immediately respond to requests for comment after market hours. A spokeswoman for Connecticut Attorney General William Tong did not immediately respond to a similar request.
Brand names of some products in the case included the acne medication Differin, anti-fungal medicine Lotrimin AF Cream, and Ritalin for attention deficit disorder and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
The case is Connecticut et al v. Sandoz Inc et al, U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut, No. 20-00802.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Himani Sarkar)
