Warner Chilcott PLC should not be allowed to duck pay-for-delay multidistrict litigation concerning the contraceptive pill Loestrin, as amended claims concerning the allegations were properly filed, direct and indirect purchasers told the Rhode Island federal court in separate filings on Friday.
The indirect purchasers argue that motions to dismiss filed last month by Warner Chilcott — which the plaintiffs allege entered into agreements with Lupin Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc. to delay generic entry of Loestrin — should be tossed. They claim that the company put forward overly narrow readings of state competition laws, it proposed pleading and standing requirements that do not exist, and it tried to overly restrict how state laws may be applied, according to arguments in the indirect purchasers’ opposition memorandum.
The indirect purchasers — such as the Allied Services Division Welfare Fund and the Electrical Workers 242 and 294 Health & Welfare Fund — allege that they have clearly established standing in states such as Illinois, Utah and Rhode Island. Unlike assertions by the defendants, they purport that various state laws do not require them to specifically allege consumer deception so that the claims under the consumer protection laws may be deemed to be properly pled, according to the memorandum.
The full article can be read here.