Skip to main content

Displaying 521 - 540 of 1511

Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al. v. Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al.

Date
Citation Number
16-2113
Federal Court
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Brief of the Federal Trade Commission as amicus curiae , taking no position on the merits of the case, but explaining that the district court erroneously dismissed the complaint on Noerr-Pennington...

The Penn State Hershey Medical Center/PinnacleHealth System, In the Matter of

The Commission issued an administrative complaint alleging that the combination of Penn State Hershey Medical Center and PinnacleHealth System would substantially reduce competition for general acute care inpatient hospital services in the area surrounding Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and lead to reduced quality and higher health care costs for the area’s employers and residents.  The Commission also authorized staff to file a preliminary injunction to maintain the status quo pending the outcome of its administrative proceeding.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
141 0191
Docket Number
9368

Penn State Hershey Medical Center, FTC and Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v.

The FTC issued an administrative complaint and authorized staff to file a preliminary injunction to block Penn State Hershey Medical Center's proposed merger with PinnacleHealth System. The complaint alleged that combining the two health care providers would substantially reduce competition for general acute care inpatient hospital services sold to commercial health plans iin four south-central Pennsylvania counties, leading to reduced quality and higher prices for employers and residents. 

Type of Action
Federal
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
141 0191
D09368

LabMD, Inc., In the Matter of

The Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint against medical testing laboratory LabMD, Inc. alleging that the company failed to reasonably protect the security of consumers’ personal data, including medical information. The complaint alleges that in two separate incidents, LabMD collectively exposed the personal information of approximately 10,000 consumers. The complaint alleges that LabMD billing information for over 9,000 consumers was found on a peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing network and then, in 2012, LabMD documents containing sensitive personal information of at least 500 consumers were found in the hands of identity thieves. The case is part of an ongoing effort by the Commission to ensure that companies take reasonable and appropriate measures to protect consumers’ personal data.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
102 3099
Docket Number
9357

Teva and Allergan, In the Matter of

Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. agreed to sell the rights and assets related to 79 pharmaceutical products to settle FTC charges that its proposed $40.5 billion acquisition of Allergan plc’s generic pharmaceutical business would be anticompetitive. The remedy requires Teva to divest the drug portfolio to eleven firms, and will preserve competition in U.S. pharmaceutical markets where Teva and Allergan compete now or would likely have competed in the future if not for the merger. The divested products include anesthetics, antibiotics, weight loss drugs, oral contraceptives, and treatments for a wide variety of diseases and conditions, including ADHD, allergies, arthritis, cancers, diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, mental illnesses, opioid dependence, pain, Parkinson’s disease, and respiratory, skin and sleep disorders. The acquirers of the divested products are Mayne Pharma Group Ltd., Impax Laboratories, Inc., Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Sagent Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cipla Limited, Zydus Worldwide DMCC, Mikah Pharma LLC, Perrigo Pharma International D.A.C., Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc., Prasco LLC and 3M Company.  In addition to the product divestitures, to address the anticompetitive effects likely to arise in markets for 15 pharmaceutical products where Teva supplies active pharmaceutical ingredients to current or future Allergan competitors, the FTC order additionally requires Teva to offer these existing API customers the option of entering into long-term API supply contracts.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
151 0196
Docket Number
C-4589

Mylan, N.V., In the Matter of

Mylan Inc. agreed to divest the rights and assets related to two generic pharmaceutical products in order to settle FTC charges that its proposed $7.2 billion acquisition of Swedish drug maker Meda would be anticompetitive. The FTC order preserves competition in the markets for 250 mg generic carisoprodol tablets, which treat muscle spasms and stiffness, and for 400 mg and 600 mg generic felbamate tablets, which treat refractory epilepsy. Under the proposed order, the U.S.-based generic pharmaceutical company Alvogen Pharma US, Inc. will acquire all of Mylan’s rights and assets related to 400 mg and 600 mg felbamate tablets. The proposed order also requires Mylan to provide transitional services and take all actions that are necessary for Alvogen to obtain FDA approval to manufacture and market 400 mg and 600 mg generic felbamate tablets. According to the FTC’s complaint, Meda and one other company currently market 250 mg generic carisoprodol tablets, and Mylan, which owns the U.S. marketing rights to a recently approved carisoprodol product, is the next likely entrant. Without a remedy, the acquisition would eliminate Mylan’s entry as a third independent competitor, delaying beneficial competition and future price decreases. Under the proposed order, Mylan must relinquish its U.S. marketing rights for the drug. With the settlement, Indicus Pharma LLC, which owns the product, manufactures it, and markets it internationally, will compete independently in the U.S. market.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
161 0102
Docket Number
C-4590

FTC Staff Comment to the Delaware Board of Dietetics/Nutrition Regarding Its Proposed Telehealth Regulation

Date
Matter Number
V160015
FTC staff submitted a comment to the Delaware Board of Dietetics/Nutrition regarding its proposed telehealth regulation that would require in-person initial evaluations of patients, and then allow...

Victrex plc, et al., In the Matter of

Invibio agreed to settle charges that it used long-term supply contracts to exclude rivals and maintain its monopoly in implant-grade polyetheretherketone, known as PEEK, which is sold to medical device makers. The FTC’s complaint alleges that two other companies,Solvay Specialty Polymers LLC and Evonik Corporation, later entered the implant-grade PEEK market, but Invibio’s anticompetitive tactics impeded them from effectively competing for customers. Through these exclusive contracting practices, the complaint alleges that Invibio has been able to maintain high prices for PEEK, despite entry from Solvay and Evonik; to prevent its customers from using more than one source of supply, despite their business preference to do so; and to impede Solvay and Evonik from developing into fully effective competitors. Under the consent order, Invibio, Inc. and Invibio Limited, along with their corporate parent, Victrex plc, are generally prohibited from entering into exclusive supply contracts and from preventing current customers from using an alternate source of PEEK in new products. In addition, the companies must allow current customers meeting certain conditions to modify existing contracts to eliminate the requirement that the customer purchase PEEK for existing products exclusively from Invibio.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
141 0042