On Monday, September 30, 2024, U.S. District Court Judge Ronnie Abrams of the Southern District of New York adopted the report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron that the classes proposed by the end-payor plaintiffs (EPPs) and direct purchaser plaintiffs (DPPs) met the requirements for certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23. The court’s ruling officially certifies EPP and DPP actions as class actions, a major victory in the long-standing litigation against Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. and its affiliates (Takeda) concerning the delayed entry of generic pioglitazone (Actos). According to plaintiffs, the delayed availability of generic Actos caused consumers and entities that purchased or reimbursed Actos to overpay for both the branded and generic versions of the drug.
Judge Ronnie Abrams agreed with Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron’s report recommending class certification, holding that the plaintiffs met the rigorous requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23. The court rejected Takeda’s objections, which centered around issues of personal jurisdiction and whether the plaintiffs could meet the necessary predominance standard under federal law.
In addressing the objections, the court concluded that EPPs presented sufficient common issues across the class that could be proven with common evidence, such as whether Takeda’s conduct led to delayed generic competition, and that these common issues predominated over any questions affecting individual class members. The court also agreed that EPPs’ method for identifying class members was sufficiently feasible and did not violate Takeda’s due process rights.
The antitrust litigation, filed in 2013, alleges that Takeda engaged in illegal tactics to delay the approval and marketing of generic competitors to Actos, thereby maintaining a monopoly over the market. Plaintiffs claim that Takeda’s actions resulted in higher prices for the drug, costing consumers, health plans, and direct purchasers millions of dollars. These tactics are said to have included improperly listing patents with the FDA and engaging in exclusionary practices to hinder generic manufacturers from entering the market. Now that class certification has been granted, the case will move forward.
WBE is serving as Interim Co-Lead Counsel in this case on behalf of end-payor plaintiffs. To learn more about this case, visit our website.