Our client’s motion for summary judgment was granted in this pharmaceutical antitrust matter involving allegations of market foreclosure.
Retained by O’Melveny & Myers
The plaintiff, Fresenius Kabi, alleged that Par Pharmaceuticals blocked Fresenius from obtaining the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) necessary to produce a generic version of Par’s branded vasopressin injection drug by having alleged arrangements with several API suppliers. Fresenius further claimed that Par’s actions allowed it to enhance its market power and extract monopoly profits.
Counsel for Par retained Cornerstone Research to support expert testimony by Timothy Bresnahan of Stanford University and Celeste Saravia of Cornerstone Research.
Professor Bresnahan addressed the plaintiff’s foreclosure allegations by analyzing the relevant API supplier market to evaluate the availability of potential suppliers. He also rebutted the plaintiff’s analysis of monopoly power and explained the economics of exclusive agreements.
Dr. Saravia analyzed the plaintiff’s presumption that Par’s alleged arrangements caused Fresenius’s failure to enter the vasopressin injection market and rebutted the plaintiff’s damages analyses. She identified numerous conceptual errors and assumptions inconsistent with economic theory that rendered the plaintiff’s analyses unreliable.
In her opinion, the judge stated that the plaintiff’s lawsuit was “unduly speculative,” and concluded that because “Fresenius has not established causation or an antitrust injury, no further analysis is required.” The judge granted summary judgment in Par’s favor.