On Tuesday, Impax Laboratories said that it has reached an agreement to pay $145 million to settle antitrust class actions alleging that the pharmaceutical company conspired unlawfully with Endo International Plc to postpone the release of a generic version of its Opana ER opioid medication.
Just a few weeks after a jury in a federal court in Chicago dismissed accusations that Endo had broken federal antitrust laws, the parties reached a deal to resolve the claims made by plaintiff medication wholesalers Value Drug Co and Meijer Inc.
As the trial was about to begin, Impax, which had been a defendant, negotiated an agreement in principle but withheld the details of the settlement. A judge of the U.S. District Court in Chicago will examine the preliminary agreement.
In their Tuesday filing asking the court to approve the settlement, the plaintiffs' lawyers said that class members would get sizeable cash compensation while the case against Impax was put to rest and avoided the inherent hazards of jury trials and any appeals.
A message requesting comment received no immediate response from the lead class counsel. Even a spokesperson from Impax, which is now controlled by the New Jersey-based Amneal Pharmaceuticals Inc., and the company's attorney, Devora Allon of Kirkland & Ellis, did not immediately reply to requests for comment.
Impax has kept up its denial of the plaintiffs' claims and refused to accept responsibility as part of the settlement. The legal dispute started in 2014, and the judge last year recognized classes of health insurers, direct buyers like Value Drug, and distributors that paid for or reimbursed the cost of branded or generic versions of Opana ER.
According to the plaintiffs, Impax and Endo agreed in a 2010 agreement to postpone the introduction of generic Opana ER on the market, and Endo promised it would not approve a competing generic until 180 days after Impax's medicine entered the market.
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission filed antitrust complaints against Endo and Impax in 2021, but a U.S. District Judge dismissed the complaints in March. According to the complaint, a 2017 agreement between the businesses unjustly restrained their ability to compete with one another.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is now hearing the FTC's appeal. In the Chicago case, the plaintiffs declared they would want up to $58 million in legal expenses as part of the settlement, or up to 40% of the settlement money.
