On Monday, March 31, 2025, U.S. District Court Judge Ronnie Abrams of the Southern District of New York partially granted summary judgment to two classes of Plaintiffs who purchased the diabetes medication Actos directly or through intermediaries. In addition, Judge Abrams denied Defendant Takeda’s motion for summary judgment in full.
In her order, Judge Abrams found that there is no genuine dispute that Actos manufacturer Takeda Pharmaceuticals satisfied the “willful maintenance” element of a monopolization claim when it allegedly misdescribed certain patents as “drug product” patents in its January 2010 submission to the FDA. The parties cross-moved for summary judgment on Takeda’s regulatory compliance defense, and Judge Abrams held that questions of fact remain for a jury to decide with respect to certain elements of that defense.
In addition to establishing a key component of Plaintiffs’ antitrust claims, the court also made several rulings regarding expert witness testimony. Notably, the court granted in part the Plaintiffs’ motion to exclude certain opinions from Takeda’s regulatory experts, agreeing that these experts could not testify about what the law required, the reasonableness of Takeda’s conduct, or the soundness of legal advice Takeda received.
The court’s decision comes after more than ten years of litigation and cross-motions for summary judgment by both parties. The case, In re Actos Antitrust Litigation, Case No. 13-cv-09244, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is scheduled to go to trial in Summer of 2025. WBE was appointed as Interim Co-Lead Counsel for the End-Payor Plaintiffs, and has worked closely with co-lead counsel Hilliard & Shadowen LLP, Miller Shah LLP, and Motley Rice LLP.