Skelaxin Direct Anitrust Litigation Settlement

Class Members Eligible for Skelaxin Direct Anitrust Litigation Settlement:

You are in the Class if you are an entity in the United States that purchased Skelaxin directly from King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. at any time between November 4, 2005 and April 30, 2014. Excluded from the Class are the Defendants, and their officers, directors, management, employees, subsidiaries, and affiliates, and all federal governmental entities. Also excluded from the Class are plaintiffs in Rite Aid Corporation et al v. King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al (C.A. 1:13-cv-00005) and Walgreen Co. et al v. King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al (C.A. 1:12-cv-00203) to the extent those plaintiffs have assignments to be enforced for purchases of Skelaxin or generic metaxalone during the Class period.

Skelaxin Direct Anitrust Litigation Settlement Case History:

Plaintiffs allege in a class action on behalf of direct purchasers of Skelaxin that the Defendants violated federal antitrust laws by unlawfully delaying the introduction of generic versions of the prescription drug Skelaxin into the United States market. The Plaintiffs allege that King (1) wrongfully listed various patents in the United States Food and Drug Administration’s (“FDA”) “Orange Book,” (2) filed sham patent litigation against generic competitors, and (3) filed sham petitions with the FDA to delay FDA approval of generic versions of Skelaxin.

The Plaintiffs also allege that King and Mutual (1) entered into an unlawful market allocation agreement in which Mutual agreed not to launch a generic version of Skelaxin in the United States in exchange for payments by King; (2) failed to advise a federal court that the dispute between them had been resolved and instead used the pendency of the case to create the false appearance to the court, the FDA, and the Federal Trade Commission that Mutual was vigorously attempting to bring a competing generic drug to market; (3) engaged in a campaign of filing sham petitions with the FDA to delay FDA approval of generic versions of Skelaxin; and (4) pursued sham patent litigation against a generic competitor to enforce an invalid patent.

The Plaintiffs argue that this alleged conduct suppressed or eliminated competition that Skelaxin would have faced from generic competitors. The Plaintiffs further claim that Class Members were injured as a result of the Defendants’ acts by paying more for Skelaxin than they would have paid otherwise and/or by being unable to purchase less expensive, generic versions of Skelaxin. As a result, the Plaintiffs claim that direct purchasers were overcharged for Skelaxin and its generic versions.

The Defendants deny all these allegations, including that any Plaintiff or Class Member is entitled to damages or other relief. The Settlement is not an admission of wrongdoing by any of the Defendants. No trial has been held.

Our Class Action Settlement Services:

CAC Recovery navigates the complex intricacies of the Skelaxin Direct Anitrust Litigation Settlement claims filing process to help businesses maximize their settlement recoveries.

Our class action settlement services include:

  • Identifying class action claims where businesses may be eligible to file
  • Filing the class action claim with supporting documentation
  • Interacting with the class action Claims Administrator
  • Providing updates on class action claim settlements status
  • Resolving Claims Administrator questions on claims
  • Reviewing the recovery to assure the correct compensation claims amount has been received

Our Guarantee: We Get Paid When You Recover – No hidden charges or up-front fees. We provide our class action settlements services based on a contingency fee.

Getting Started is easy! If you represent a business we’ll first have you fill out our Get Started form and a CAC representative will contact you within 24 hours to review your eligibility and walk you through the claims process.