Court Rejects Novo Nordisk Bid to Block Lilly’s GLP-1 Advertising
A federal judge has denied Novo Nordisk’s request for a preliminary injunction blocking Eli Lilly from running allegedly misleading advertisements comparing its GLP-1 drugs Zepbound and Mounjaro with Novo’s Wegovy and Ozempic, finding that Novo failed to demonstrate irreparable harm.
In a 10/26 opinion, U.S. District Judge Zahid Quraishi of New Jersey ruled that Novo had not established that Lilly’s advertising threatened its sales, damaged its goodwill or caused lasting harm to its clinical reputation.
Novo’s July complaint alleged violations of federal and state false-advertising and unfair-competition laws, including the Lanham Act. The company contended that Lilly’s advertisements misleadingly compared higher doses of Zepbound and Mounjaro with lower doses of Wegovy and Ozempic while omitting newer clinical evidence involving higher-dose semaglutide. One challenged advertisement claimed average weight loss of 50 pounds with Zepbound compared with 33 pounds with Wegovy.
In his 25-page opinion, Quraishi found that Lilly’s advertising had, at most, a negligible effect on Novo’s business between April and July, with prescriptions remaining stable. He also concluded that monetary damages could compensate Novo for any significant injury.
In its defense, Lilly invoked the doctrine of unclean hands, arguing that Novo should be barred from obtaining injunctive relief because it had engaged in similar advertising practices. Quraishi found Lilly’s argument “persuasive,” observing that Novo had employed a “nearly identical advertising strategy and now complains because it is being subjected to similar conduct.”
The ruling does not determine whether Lilly’s advertisements are false or misleading. The underlying litigation remains pending.