Skip to Main Content
Wexler Boley & Elgersma LLP
  • Our Firm
    • Who We Serve
      • Shareholders
      • Whistleblowers
      • Consumers
      • Businesses
      • Government Entities
    • Our Professionals
    • Working with Wexler Boley & Elgersma LLP
    • Locations
    • News
    • Careers
    • Report Your Concern
    • Testimonials
  • Practice Areas
    • Antitrust Litigation
    • Business & Commercial Litigation
    • Securities & Corporate Governance
    • Healthcare Litigation
    • Consumer Protection
    • Whistle Blower False Claims Litigation
    • Government Representation
    • Employment Litigation
  • Cases
    • Antitrust Litigation Cases
    • Business & Commercial Litigation Cases
    • Consumer Protection Cases
    • Employment Litigation Cases
    • Government Representation Cases
    • Healthcare Litigation Cases
    • Mass Tort Litigation Cases
    • Securities & Corporate Governance Cases
    • Whistle Blower False Claims Cases
  • Investigations
    • Rental Rate Antitrust Lawsuit
    • Automobile 3G Network Shutdown Lawsuit
    • Similac Toxic Infant Formula Lawsuit
    • Kid’s Castle Biometric Privacy Lawsuit
    • Contaminated Baby Food Lawsuit
    • Fatal Sportmix Pet Food Recall Class Action Lawsuit
    • Claire’s Data Breach Lawsuit
    • Insurance Denial for Mental Health and Substance Abuse Treatment
    • Perpetual Sales Litigation
    • Railroad Price-Fixing Lawsuit
    • Medicare Advantage Fraud Litigation
    • Biometric Fingerprinting Litigation
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
See all news
9.30.2019

Judge Certifies 2 Classes in Suboxone Product Hop Antitrust Lawsuit

On Friday, September 27, 2019, a Pennsylvania federal judge certified two classes of plaintiffs in an antitrust lawsuit concerning an alleged product-hopping scheme with the opioid treatment drug Suboxone.

U.S. District Judge Mitchell Goldberg certified a class of direct purchasers of Suboxone, as well as a class of end-payors, in the multidistrict litigation against manufacturer Indivior PLC. The lawsuit, In Re: Suboxone Antitrust Litigation, alleges that Indivior engaged in an illegal product hopping scheme to prevent generic versions of Suboxone from coming to market.

In explaining his decision, Judge Goldberg asserted that the claims by the wholesalers and end-payors center on the “common question” of whether Indivior’s actions had a “legitimate business justification” or whether they were anti-competitive.

“Put another way, if each class member were required to pursue its claims individually, each class member would have to prove the same antitrust violations using the same evidence,” the judge said.

Plaintiffs in the case allege that approximately two years before generic competition for the Suboxone tablet was slated to begin, Reckitt (the company that Indivior was spun off from) began developing a different Suboxone formulation—an oral film—with the intention of destroying the market that existed for its original tablet product before generic competition could set in.  Plaintiffs further allege that Reckitt filed sham citizen petitions with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to sabotage the FDA’s Abbreviated New Drug Application process for approving generic alternatives in order to further delay generic entry and buy time to convert consumers from the tablet to the film.

The complaint alleges that, absent Reckitt’s conduct, much cheaper generic versions of Suboxone would have been available to consumers almost four years earlier. A generic tablet form version of the drug finally arrived on the market in 2013, however plaintiffs say the damage has already been done and Indivior has established a market stranglehold.

End-payors in the case are represented by Kenneth A. Wexler and Justin Boley of Wexler Wallace LLP

Share

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
Image

311 S. Wacker Drive,
Suite 5450
Chicago, IL 60606
P_312.346.2222
F_312.346.0022

  • Our Firm
  • Practice Areas
  • Cases
  • Investigations
  • Newsroom
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
  • Sitemap
  • Privacy Statement
  • Legal Disclaimer

2023 © Wexler Boley & Elgersma LLP

Wexler Boley & Elgersma uses cookies to improve the performance and functionality of this site. By using our website, you are providing us with your consent to use cookies on this site. Close Privacy Policy
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
SAVE & ACCEPT