Skip to main content

Displaying 601 - 620 of 1557

Lupin Ltd., et al., In the Matter of

Generic drug manufacturers Lupin Ltd. and Gavis Pharmaceuticals LLC agreed to sell the rights and assets for two generic drugs, in order to settle FTC charges that Lupin’s proposed $850 million acquisition of Gavis would likely be anticompetitive.The merger would have combined two of only four companies that currently market generic doxycycline monohydrate capsules in two dosage strengths, used to treat bacterial infections, likely resulting in higher prices. The merger also would have eliminated one of only a few companies likely to enter the market for  generic mesalamine extended release capsules, used to treat ulcerative colitis, in the near future, thereby delaying beneficial competition and the prospect of price decreases. Under the terms of the order, Lupin is required to transfer to G&W Laboratories all of Gavis’s rights and assets related to generic doxycycline monohydrate capsules no later than ten days after the acquisition is consummated. The order also requires that Gavis divest its rights and assets related to generic mesalamine capsules to G&W before the acquisition takes place.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
151 0202
Docket Number
C-4566

Endo Pharmaceuticals / Impax Labs

The FTC filed a complaint in federal district court alleging that Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and several other drug companies violated antitrust laws by using pay-for-delay settlements to block consumers’ access to lower-cost generic versions of Opana ER and Lidoderm with an agreement not to market an authorized generic – often called a “no-AG commitment” – as a form of reverse payment. The complaint, filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleges that Endo paid the first generic companies that filed for FDA approval – Impax Laboratories, Inc. and Watson Laboratories, Inc. – to eliminate the risk of competition for Opana ER and Lidoderm, in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act. Opana ER is an extendedrelease opioid used to relieve moderate to severe pain. Lidoderm is a topical patch used to relieve pain associated with post-herpetic neuralgia, a complication of shingles. The FTC is seeking a court judgment declaring that the defendants’ conduct violates the antitrust laws, ordering the companies to disgorge their ill-gotten gains, and permanently barring them from engaging in similar anticompetitive behavior in the future.  Teikoko Pharma USA and Teikoku Seiyaku Co., Ltd. agreed to a stipulated order resolving FTC charges.

In November 2016, the FTC voluntarily dismissed the complaint in this action.  On January 23, 2017, the FTC refiled charges related to the Lidoderm agreements in federal court in California (Federal Trade Commission vs. Allergan plc; Watson Laboratories, Inc., et al) and refiled charges related to the Opana ER agreement in a Part 3 administrative proceeding.  (In re Impax Laboratories, Inc.)

Type of Action
Federal
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
141 0004

Pfizer Inc., a corporation, and Wyeth, a corporation, In the Matter of

The Commission challenged Pfizer Inc.’s proposed $68 billion acquisition of Wyeth and required significant divestitures to preserve competition in multiple U.S. markets for animal pharmaceuticals and vaccines. The proposed consent order remedies the anticompetitive effects the Commission believes are likely to result from the transaction in numerous markets for animal vaccines and animal pharmaceutical products. After a thorough investigation, the Commission concluded that the transaction does not raise anticompetitive concerns in any human health product markets.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
091 0053
Docket Number
C-4267

Bedford Laboratories/Hikma Pharmaceuticals, In the Matter of

Generic drug marketer Hikma Pharmaceuticals PLC agreed to divest its rights and interests in five generic injectable pharmaceuticals to settle charges that its $5 million acquisition of the rights to various drug products and related assets from Ben Venue Laboratories, Inc. would likely be anticompetitive. According to the complaint, without a remedy, Hikma’s purchase of certain generic injectables would likely harm future competition in the U.S. markets for (1) Acyclovir sodium injection: an antiviral drug used to treat chicken pox, herpes, and other related infections, (2) Diltiazem hydrochloride injection: a calcium channel  blocker and antihypertensive used to treat hypertension, angina, and arrhythmias, (3) Famotidine injection: a treatment for ulcers and gastroesophageal reflux disease, (4) Prochlorperazine edisylate injection: an antipsychotic drug used to treat schizophrenia and nausea, and (5) Valproate sodium injection: a treatment for epilepsy, seizures, bipolar disorder, anxiety, and migraine headaches. Hikma is required to divest the five generic injectable drug assets to Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a California-based specialty pharmaceutical company that sells generic injectable and inhalation products.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
151 0044

FTC Staff Comment to the Alaska State Legislature Regarding Telehealth Provisions In Senate Bill 74, Which Would Allow Licensed Alaska Physicians Located Out-of-State To Provide Telehealth Services

Date
Matter Number
V160009
FTC staff submitted a comment, as public testimony, regarding proposed legislation that would allow licensed Alaska physicians located out-of-state to provide telehealth services in the same manner as...

FTC Staff Comment to the Kentucky House of Representatives Regarding House Bill 77, Which Would Recognize and Regulate Denturists

Date
Matter Number
V160008
FTC staff submitted a comment, in response to a request from Kentucky State Representative Tom Burch, on the competitive implications of proposed legislation that would license and regulate denturists...

In re Wellbutrin Antitrust Litigation

Date
Citation Number
15-3559, 15-3591, 15-3681, 15-3682
Federal Court
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Brief of the Federal Trade Commission arguing that the district court committed multiple legal errors that should be corrected on appeal. The district court erroneously concluded that a reverse...

Mylan N. V., In the Matter of (Perrigo Company), In the Matter of

Mylan N.V. agreed to sell the rights and assets related to seven generic drugs in order to settle FTC charges that its proposed acquisition of Perrigo Company plc would be substantially reduce competition in the markets for those drugs if the merger proceeded as originally proposed. 

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
151 0129
C-4557