WLF Says Court Should Grant Warner Chilcott Appeal
Washington Legal Foundation (WLF) says the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals should grant a Warner Chilcott motion asking it to reverse a Massachusetts federal court decision granting standing to plaintiffs in antitrust litigation involving the company’s drugs indicated to treat ulcerative colitis. The WLF amicus brief says it is concerned that the district court decision to grant standing to plaintiffs who admit they suffered no injury traceable to violation of many of the state laws on which they based their claims “dramatically expands the judicial power by assigning to the courts the power to enforce state statutes in contexts far removed from what has traditionally been understood to constitute an adversarial judicial proceeding.”
The litigation alleges that the company violated antitrust laws of 25 states and the District of Columbia by “product hopping” — withdrawing innovator drugs from the market to “coerce” consumers to begin using other drugs the company manufactures. It says that Warner withdrew drugs just before patent expiration to prevent consumers from being able to access low-cost generic alternatives.
The plaintiffs were four union-sponsored health benefits plans that reimbursed members who purchased the drugs but were not themselves direct purchasers of the drugs in question.
“The court held that plaintiffs adequately demonstrated standing with respect to all 26 claims by demonstrating that they had suffered some injury as a result of Warner Chilcott’s alleged product-hopping, and that they need not show that violations of each of the 26 laws caused them injury,” WLF says.
The WLF brief addresses only the question of plaintiff standing and does not address other arguments raised by the company about the propriety of class certification.