In re Lidoderm Antitrust Litigation

Updated: September 12, 2018

Status: Settled Case

Labaton Sucharow served as class counsel in a class action on behalf of end payors who purchased, paid for or were reimbursed for prescriptions of lidocaine topical patches, 5 percent, a lidocaine patch marketed jointly by Endo Pharmaceuticals and Teikoku Pharma USA under the brand name Lidoderm®.

The complaint alleged that after trial, but before a decision could be rendered on the patent suit, Endo and Teikoku agreed to provide Watson (later acquired by Actavis) at least $96 million in free-of-charge Lidoderm for resale in exchange for Watson delaying to launch its generic Lidoderm product for nearly one and half years until September 2013. In addition, Endo and Teikoku agreed not to launch an authorized generic to compete with Watson during its 180-day exclusivity period.

This pay-for-delay agreement caused the class to continue paying supracompetitive prices for Lidoderm throughout the class period, beginning August 23, 2009.

On November 17, 2014, the court ruled largely in favor of the plaintiffs on the defendants’ motion to dismiss. In February 2017, the court certified the end-payor class. The defendants appealed the certification order, and in June 2017, the Ninth Circuit declined to hear the appeal. On September 12, 2018, the court granted final approval of a $104.75 in total settlements with all defendants. 

The case is In re Lidoderm Antitrust Litigation, No. 14-md-02521 (N.D. Cal.). Plaintiffs are end-payors. Defendants are Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Teikoku Seiyaku Co., Ltd., Teikoku Pharma USA, Inc., Actavis, Inc., Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Watson Laboratories, Inc., Anda, Inc., Anda Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Valmed Pharmaceuticals, Inc.