MORGANTOWN — Drug maker Pfizer wants to be dismissed from a multistate lawsuit alleging various generic drug firms conspired to control the market and escalate prices.
In a recent set of filings seeking dismissal and stay of discovery, Pfizer tells the court that it doesn’t make generics. Its subsidiary, Greenstone, makes generics and is named as a defendant, but they aren’t the same company.
The plaintiffs in this case, underway in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania are 43 states, including West Virginia, along with Puerto Rico; more than 40 similar suits are before the same court.
Israel-based Teva is the primary defendant. All told, counting parent and subsidiary companies, it names 59 companies and 17 individuals as defendants. Mylan, along with two of its subsidiaries and two of its executives are among the defendants.
The complaint – amended several times, most recently in November — describes how the drug firms communicated regularly during corporate events and via phone calls, text messages and emails, to avoid competition and maintain prices by allotting “fair” share to companies for various drugs.
Pfizer argues that the November complaint makes no allegations against Pfizer, but against Greenstone. Allegations that Greenstone is Pfizer’s alter ego are unsubstantiated.
Pfizer notes that only five of 1,726 paragraphs [covering 538 pages] in the complaint mention Pfizer.
“The sparse allegations contain no claim of misconduct by Pfizer.” None of them allege that Pfizer communicated with any competitors, knew of any illegal or anticompetitive conduct or joined in any conspiracy.
The plaintiffs, Pfizer says, failed to prove that Pfizer and Greenstone function as a single entity or that Pfizer used Greenstone as a front for illegal purposes. Two Greenstone employees – one current, one former – named in the complaint were never Pfizer employees.
Pfizer fills a number of pages with arguments and precedents to show that while it and Greenstone share a campus and various corporate resources, that doesn’t meet the legal standard to prove they’re the same company.
Pfizer asks to be dismissed from the case with prejudice so that the plaintiffs can’t rework another amended complaint to craft more detailed charges against it.
Pfizer also asked the court to stay discovery until the court rules on its dismissal motion.
Judge Cynthia M. Rufe agreed to stay discovery and has given the plaintiffs until Jan. 28 to respond to both of Pfizer’s motions.
Not relevant to this case but notable as an observation of the intertwined world of pharmaceuticals is that Mylan and a Pfizer branded-drug subsidiary, Upjohn, are pursuing a merger into a joint company to be called Viatris. The merger is expected to close sometime around the middle of 2020.
Tweet David Beard @dbeardtdp Email dbeard@dominionpost.com
