Legal Opinion
In re Loestrin 24 Fe Antitrust Litigation
District Court, D. Rhode Island
Decided August 8, 2017No. MDL No. 13-2472-S-PAS; No. 1:13-md-2472-S-PASPublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*314OPINION AND ORDER
William E. Smith, Chief Judge
The plaintiffs in this multidistrict litigation (“MDL”) seek damages from the defendant-pharmaceutical companies for an allegedly anti-competitive scheme relating to Loestrin 24 FE (“Loestrin 24”), an oral contraceptive comprising 24 norethindrone acetate/ethinyl estradiol (1 mg/20 meg) tablets and four ferrous fumarate tablets.
In June 2013, the United States Supreme Court decided a landmark patent antitrust case, FTC v. Actavis, Inc., 570 U.S. 136, 133 S.Ct. 2223, 186 L.Ed.2d 343 (2013), which held that “reverse payments”—settlement payments in…
2Cases cited88 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Hines v. DavidowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
83 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- In re Generic Pharm. Pricing Antitrust Litig.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2019
- In re EpipenDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2018
- In re Dealer Management Systems Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Illinois · 2019
- 1199seiu Nat'l Benefit Fund v. Allergan, Inc. (In re Restasis (Cyclosporine Ophthalmic Emulsion) Antitrust Litig.)District Court, E.D. New York · 2018
- Picone v. Shire U.S. Inc. (Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Class Action)District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2020
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.