Tag: Antitrust

$23M Solodyn Antibiotic Antitrust Class Action Settlement

Who is a Class Member

You are included in the Aggrenox Generic Drug Delay Antitrust Class Action Settlement “if you purchased, paid or reimbursed for all or part of the cost of Solodyn® or generic versions of Solodyn® during the period from July 23, 2009 through February 20, 2018.”

Note: No one is claiming that Solodyn or its generic version is unsafe or ineffective.

If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other class action settlements you may be eligible for.

Settlement Amount

  • $23,000,000.00

Estimated Award

  • VARIES

Your individual payout will be based on a number of factors, including the number of valid claims filed by all Settlement Class Members and the dollar value of each member of the Class’ purchase(s) in proportion to the total claims filed. A detailed Plan of Allocation can be found here.

Proof of Purchase

  • Claimants will need to provide the total amount paid for purchases or reimbursement of Solodyn or generic versions.

Note: The Claims Administrator may ask for additional proof of payment such as itemized receipts, credit card statements, or records from your Pharmacy to verify the information on your claim form.

Claim Form

  • class action lawsuits

Solodyn Antibiotic Antitrust Settlement Notes

  • In Re Solodyn (Minocycline Hydrochloride)) Antitrust Litigation
  • Case No. 14-md-02503
  • Pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts

A group of indirect purchasers of Solodyn and its generic equivalent brought this antitrust class action lawsuit against Medicis Pharmaceutical Corp., Impax Laboratories, Inc., Lupin Limited, Lupin Pharmaceuticals Inc., and Sandoz Inc. Specifically, the case alleges that the defendants hurt competition by delaying the availability of a less-expensive generic veriosnof the antibiotic drug Solodyn. This caused consumers and third-party payors to pay too much for the drug.

Solodyn is an antibiotic oral medication used to treat moderate to severe acne in people 12 years of age and order. It works by stopping the growth of bacteria that may make acne worse. It is not an antibiotic used to treat colds or flu.

All of the defendants deny any wrongdoing. As of right now, this settlement involves only Medicis, who agreed to provide a cash payment of $23 million. Impax Laboratories settled separately for $20 million and the other three defendants already settled.

Again, no one is claiming that Solodyn or its generic counterpart is unsafe or ineffective.

Complete details are provided in the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement and other related documents are available on the Solodyn Antitrust Settlement website.

Class members who wish to object to the terms of the Solodyn Antitrust Settlement must do so by May 28, 2018. Class members who wish to submit a claim must do so by July 31, 2018.

Important Dates

  • 7/31/18: Claim Form Deadline
  • 5/28/18: Objection Deadline
  • 7/19/18: Final Hearing at 1:00 pm ET* (class members do not need to attend this hearing in order to receive a slice of the settlement pie).

*Settlement Class Members who wish to speak at the hearing should check www.SolodynCase.com to confirm that the date or time of the Hearing has not been changed.

Contact Information

  • Mail: In re Solodyn Antitrust Litigation (End-Payor Action), c/o A.B. Data, Ltd., P.O. Box 173034, Milwaukee, WI 53217
  • Phone: 1-800-332-7414
  • Email: info@SolodynCase.com

Class Counsel

Settlement Website

Posted on by CAWClass 0

$54M Aggrenox Generic Drug Antitrust Class Action Settlement

Who is a Class Member

The Aggrenox Generic Drug Delay Antitrust Class Action Settlement consists of two Classes:

Consumer Class:

  • “From November 30, 2009 through December 22, 2017, you purchased or paid for some or all of the purchase price for Aggrenox and/or its generic versions in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Arizona, California, Colorado, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin, for consumption by yourself or your family.”

Third Party Payor (TPP) Class:

  • “From November 30, 2009 through December 22, 2017, you purchased, paid and/or reimbursed for some or all of the purchase price for Aggrenox and/or its generic versions in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Arizona, California, Colorado, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon1 , Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin, for consumption by your members, employees, insureds, participants, or beneficiaries.”

Note: No one is claiming that Aggrenox or its generic equivalent is unsafe or ineffective.

If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other class action settlements you may be eligible for.

Settlement Amount

  • $54,000,000.00

Estimated Award

  • VARIES

Your individual payout will be based on a number of factors, including the number of valid claims filed by all Settlement Class Members and the dollar value of each member of the Class’ purchase(s) in proportion to the total claims filed.

Proof of Purchase

  • Claimants will need to provide the number of prescriptions purchased and total amount of their out-of-pocket costs for purchases or reimbursement of Aggrenox or generic versions.

Note: The Claims Administrator may require you to show proof of payment such as receipts or credit card statements to verify the information on your claim form.

Claim Form

  • class action lawsuits

Aggrenox Antitrust Settlement Notes

  • In re Aggrenox Antitrust Litigation
  • Case No. 3:14-md-2516-SRU
  • Pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut

This class action lawsuit centers on the price of Aggrenox and whether its manufacturer, Boehringer Ingelheim purposely delayed the release of a less-expensive generic version of the anticoagulant drug. Reportedly, Boehringer colluded with Barr (acquired by Teva) to unlawfully settle Aggrenox patent lawsuits. These actions led to consumers and third party purchasers to pay higher prices for Aggrenox then had a generic version been made available.

Boehringer and Teva deny the allegations and maintain they by settling the patent lawsuits they did not violate antitrust or consumer protection laws. Furthermore, the defendants assert these actions never caused any delay of the release generic Aggrenox into the market.

Again, no one is claiming that Aggrenox or its generic equivalent is unsafe or ineffective.

Complete details are provided in the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement and other related documents are available on the Aggrenox Antitrust Settlement website.

Class members who wish to excludes themselves or object to the terms of the Aggrenox Antitrust Settlement must do so by May 11, 2018. Class members who wish to submit a claim must do so by September 14, 2018.

Important Dates

  • 9/14/18: Claim Form Deadline
  • 5/11/18: Objection or Exclusion Deadline
  • 7/19/18: Final Hearing at 1:00 pm ET* (class members do not need to attend this hearing in order to receive a slice of the settlement pie).

*Settlement Class Members who wish to speak at the hearing should check www.InReAggrenoxAntitrustLitigation.com to confirm that the date or time of the Hearing has not been changed.

Contact Information

  • Mail: Aggrenox Settlement, c/o A.B. Data Ltd., P.O. Box 173046, Milwaukee, WI 53217
  • Phone: 1-800-494-2165
  • Email: info@InReAggrenoxAntitrustLitigation.com

Class Counsel

Settlement Website

Posted on by CAWClass 1

$1.425M Ductile Iron Pipe Fittings Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Class Action Settlement

Who is a Class Member

You are a member of the Ductile Iron Pipe Fittings Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Class Action Settlement if you or your company or non-federal governmental entity purchased DIPF originally made or sold by one of the Defendants during the period from and including January 11, 2008, up to and including December 31, 2013, from someone other than one of the Defendants.

The defendants in this case are McWane Inc., and its divisions, Clow Water Systems Co. Tyler Pipe Company, and Tyler Union.

If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other class action settlements you may be eligible for.

Settlement Amount

  • $1,425,000.00

Estimated Award

  • TBD

The Net settlement fund will be divided equally among Class members who submit a timely claim form. The actual payout will depend on how many valid claims forms are received.

Proof of Purchase

  • Class members will need to indicate their DIPF purchases.

Claim Form

  • class action lawsuits

Ductile Iron Pipe Fittings Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Settlement Notes

  • In re Ductile Iron Pipe Fittings (“DIPF”) Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Litigation
  • Case No. 3:12-cv-00169-AET-LHG
  • Pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey

The plaintiffs in this antitrust class action litigation claim that McWane participated in a conspiracy to fix prices of Ductile Iron Pipe Fittings in violation of the Sherman Act. Additionally, the complaint states that McWane conspired to monopolize and restrain trade in the domestic Ductile Iron Pipe Fittings market.

These alleged price-fixing actions had indirect purchasers of Ductile Iron Pipe Fittings paying more than they should have.

McWane denies all of the allegations and maintains it did nothing wrong but entered into the settlement solely to avoid the inconvienence and expense of continued litigation. Complete details about the case and settlement are provided on the DIPF Indirect Purchases Antitrust settlement website.

Class members who wish to object to or exclude themselves from the First Resolution Investment Debt Collection settlement must do so by April 10, 2018. Class members who wish to participate in the settlement must submit a claim form on or before June 27, 2018.

Important Dates

  • 6/27/18: Claim Form Deadline
  • 5/23/18: Objection Deadline
  • 5/29/18: Exclusion Deadline
  • 6/13/19: Final Hearing at 9:30 am ET* (class members do not need to attend this hearing in order to receive a slice of the settlement pie).

*Settlement Class Members who wish to speak at the hearing should check www.DIPFIndirectSettlement.com to confirm that the date or time of the Hearing has not been changed.

Contact Information

  • Mail: DIPF Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Litigation, c/o GCG, P.O. Box 10251, Dublin, OH 43017-5751
  • Phone: 1-855-907-3111

Class Counsel

Settlement Website

Posted on by CAWClass 0

$3.5M DuPont Titanium Paint Price-Fixing Class Action Settlement

Who is a Class Member

The DuPont Titanium Paint Price-Fixing class action settlement provides benefits for the following two Classes:

Injunctive Relief National Settlement Class: “All purchasers in the United States of Architectural Paint for personal use and not for resale containing, in some form, Titanium Dioxide manufactured by one or more of the Defendants or co-conspirators, or any predecessors, parents, subsidiaries, or affiliates thereof from January 1, 2002 until December 13, 2017.”

Damages Settlement Class: “All purchasers who either: (1) purchased Architectural Paint from a seller in a Damages State, or (2) who reside in a Damages State and purchased Architectural Paint in the United States, provided that in either case the Architectural Paint purchased was for personal use and not for resale containing, in some form, Titanium Dioxide manufactured by one or more of the Defendants or co-conspirators, or any predecessors, parents, subsidiaries, or affiliates thereof from January 1, 2002 until December 13, 2017.

The Damages States include: Arizona, Arkansas, California, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.

If the paint was bought for resale, it is not included in this settlement.

If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other class action settlements you may be eligible for.

Settlement Amount

  • $3,500,000.00

Estimated Award

  • Varies

Each qualifying Claimant who submits a valid and timely claim form is expected to receive a cash payment of $0.76 per gallon of paint.

Proof of Purchase

  • Claimants will need to provide the following information on their claim form:
    • Number of Gallons Purchased
    • Approximate Date of Purchase
    • Purchase State
    • State Resided in at Time of Purchase

You do not need to submit your original Purchase Receipt or other Proof of Purchase; however, failure to include these could result in the reduction of your claim if it exceeds 10 gallons of paint.

Claim Form

  • class action lawsuits

DuPont Titanium Paint Price-Fixing Settlement Notes

  • Jan Harrison, et al. v. DuPont, et al.,
  • Case No. 5:13-cv-01180-BLF
  • Pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

A group of plaintiffs across the country brought this class action lawsuit against Dupont, Huntsman, Kronos, and Millennium Inorganic Chemicals alleging the companies unlawfully engaged in a price-fixing scheme for Titanium Dioxide, a primary ingredient in Architectural Paint. Architectural paint includes any paint you would have used to paint something around your home or business, such as walls, floors, ceilings, or some other surfaces inside or outside.

According to court documents, the defendants are accused of violating antitrust laws and conspiring to make the price of Titanium Dioxide higher in order to restrain competition. These actions resulted in consumers paying more than they should have for Architectural Paint products.

DuPont and the other named defendants deny they did anything illegal or that paint prices for consumers changed as a result of the price of titanium dioxide changing, up or down, but agreed to settle the case for $3.5 million. Complete details about the case and settlement can be found on the Titanium Paint Price-Fixing Settlement website.

The DuPont Titanium Paint Price-Fixing class action settlement was granted preliminary approval on December 13, 2017. Class members who wish to exclude themselves or object to the settlement must do so by June 15, 2018. Class members who wish to receive a cash payment from the settlement must submit their claim form on or before June 15, 2018.

Important Dates

  • 6/15/18: Claim Form Deadline
  • 6/15/18: Objection or Exclusion Deadline
  • 8/16/18: Final Hearing at 1:30 p.m. PT* (class members do not need to attend this hearing in order to receive a slice of the settlement pie).

*Settlement Class Members who wish to speak at the hearing should check www.TitaniumPaintSettlement.com to confirm that the date or time of the Hearing has not been changed.

Contact Information

  • Mail: Titanium Dioxide Paint Settlement Administrator, P.O. Box 1571, West Palm Beach, FL 33402
  • Phone: 1-877-388-5623
  • Email: info@titaniumpaintsettlement.com

Class Counsel

Settlement Website

Posted on by CAWClass 0