Lidorderm Generic Delay Class Action Settlement
There are two categories of End-Payor Class Members in this matter; Consumer and Third-Party Payor End-Payor Class Members.
As a Consumer, you may be a member of the End-Payor Class if:
You are a person in the United States and its territories who, in Arizona, California, Florida, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, West Virginia, or Wisconsin and for consumption by yourself or your family member, paid for some or all of the purchase price of:
- Branded Lidoderm for the time period August 23, 2012 through September 14, 2013; and/or AB-rated generic Lidoderm for the time period September 15, 2013 through August 1, 2014.
As a Consumer, you are NOT a member of the End-Payor Class if:
- You are one of the Defendants and their officers, directors, management, employees, subsidiaries, and affiliates;
- After September 15, 2013, you paid and/or provided reimbursements for branded Lidoderm and did not purchase or reimburse for generic Lidoderm; You purchased Lidoderm or generic Lidoderm only via a “single flat co-pay,” i.e. a fixed dollar co-payment that does not vary on the basis of the purchased drug’s status as branded or generic (e.g., $20 for both branded and generic drugs);
- You purchased Lidoderm or generic Lidoderm only after September 15, 2013, via a “flat generic co-pay, i.e. a fixed dollar copayment (e.g., $10 for generic drugs) regardless of the co-payment applicable to branded drugs;
- You purchased or received Lidoderm or its AB-rated generic equivalent through a Medicaid program only; or You are one of the judges in this case or a member of their immediate families.
As a Third-Party Payor, you may be a member of the End-Payor Class if:
Proof of Purchase
In re: Lidoderm Antitrust Litigation,Case No. 14-md-2521-WHO District Court for the Northern District of California
This lawsuit is about whether Defendants entered into an anticompetitive agreement to delay the availability of allegedly less expensive generic versions of Lidoderm. End-Payor Plaintiffs allege that, as part of settlement of a patent lawsuit that Endo and Teikoku brought against Watson, Endo and Teikoku agreed to pay Watson to not to start selling an authorized generic version of Lidoderm from August 2012 until September 2013 (the “Patent Settlement”). End-Payor Plaintiffs contend that the Patent Settlement was anticompetitive and violated state laws in the Class States.
$105,000,000 apron combined pool