Picone v. Shire U.S. Inc. (Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Class Action)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS * * * In re INTUNIV ANTITRUST * Civil Action No. 16-cv-12396-ADB (Indirect) LITIGATION * * * * MEMORANDUM AND ORDER BURROUGHS, D.J. This case involves allegations that the Defendants settled patent litigation over the ADHD drug Intniv on anticompetitive terms. The Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs (“IPPs”) are parents and caretakers who purchased Intuniv or generic Intuniv for a child’s or ward’s medical needs.1 The IPPs claim that the Defendants engaged in sham patent litigation over Intuniv, and then settled that litigation on terms that…