The Third Circuit recently affirmed the denial of class certification to end-payor health plans that alleged that the defendant’s “pay-for-delay” settlement of patent infringement litigation inflated prices on a prescription drug. In doing so, the court reaffirmed that named plaintiffs must present an administratively feasible mechanism to ascertain whether putative class members fall within the proposed class definition and thus took sides in a growing circuit split on that issue. See In re Niaspan Antitrust Litig., — F.4th –, 2023 WL 3243532 (3d Cir. 2023).
Antitrust
Minnesota Federal Court Certifies Class of Indirect Pork Purchasers Under Rule of Reason Analysis
By Pratik Agarwal on
A Minnesota federal court recently certified several classes of plaintiffs asserting antitrust claims against America’s largest pork producers and integrators. In re Pork Antitrust Litig., C.A. No. 18-1776 (D. Minn. Mar. 29, 2023).
Each class of plaintiff asserted a per se theory of harm that defendants conspired to limit the supply of pork and…