As
reported previously, the first post-Actavis jury verdict in a
"reverse payment" antitrust case handed a win to the
defendants. Now, plaintiffs in In re: Nexium
(Esomeprazole) Antitrust Litigation have moved for a new
trial, arguing that the Massachusetts federal district court
committed error in formulating the jury charge and in excluding
some of plaintiffs' evidence.
The alleged errors concern the question posed by the court to
the jury regarding causation—i.e. the anticompetitive effect
of the allegedly "large and unjustified" payment from
brand manufacturer AstraZeneca to generic manufacturer
Ranbaxy—and the court's evidentiary rulings surrounding
the same issue. The plaintiffs also argue that the Judge
Young's initial misapprehension, which he later acknowledged,
of the relationship between Ranbaxy and another generic
manufacturer "infected" rulings made throughout
trial.
