Legal Opinion
In Re: Cardizem Cd Antitrust Litigation. Louisiana Wholesale Drug Co. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc., and Andrx Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided July 24, 2003No. 00-2483PublishedCited by 105 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
OBERDORFER, District Judge.
This antitrust case arises out of an agreement entered into by the defendants, Hoescht Marion Roussel, Inc. (“HMR”), the manufacturer of the prescription drug Cardizem CD, and Andrx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Andrx”), then a potential manufacturer of a generic version of that drug. The agreement provided, in essence, that Andrx, in exchange for quarterly payments of $10 million, would refrain from marketing its generic version of Cardizem CD even after it had received FDA approval (the “Agreement”). The plaintiffs are direct and indirect purchasers of Cardizem…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of CarpentersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by105 opinions
- Bassett v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
- SD3, LLC v. Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2015
- Joblove v. Barr Labs. Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005
- In re Cardizem CD Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2003
- In Re K-Dur Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2004
100 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.