Recent 6th Circuit Decision
Late last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued a decision in J.B.D.L. Corp. v. Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories, Inc. The case concerned allegations that Wyeth’s “Preemptive Plan” in response the introduction of Duramend Pharmaceutical’s Cenestin into the Estrogen Replacement Therapy (ERT) market violated Section 2. According to the Plaintiffs in the case:
The overarching aim of the Preemptive Plan was to hold Cenestin to 2 percent of total ERT prescriptions in 1999 by: (1) emphasizing to consumers the differences between Premarin and Cenestin; (2) limiting Cenestin distribution; and (3) limiting Duramed’s contracting opportunities in the ERT markets.
The District Court granted the Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. According to the Appeals Court:
The trial court articulated several grounds for its decision: (1) the Purchasers failed to provide evidence that Wyeth harmed competition rather than a single competitor; (2) the Purchasers did not demonstrate that Wyeth’s aggressive marketing campaign violated the strictures of § 2 of the Sherman Act; and (3) there was no evidence of a causal link between Wyeth’s alleged anticompetitive conduct and the antitrust injury alleged by the Purchasers.
Upon appeal, the Sixth Circuit affirmed the judgment of the District Court.
RSS Feed
