Third Circuit Order Vacating Class Certification In In Re Lamictal Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litig.

Key Issue

The Supreme Court has held that class certification is only proper if "the trial court is satisfied, after a rigorous analysis, that the prerequisites of Rule 23(a) have been satisfied."⁴⁵ The issue in this case is whether the district court properly conducted the requisite "rigorous analysis" when it determined that direct purchaser plaintiffs' antitrust claim was capable of common proof.

Background

Plaintiffs in this case are companies that directly purchased name-brand anti-epilepsy drug Lamictal from pharmaceutical manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline ("GSK") or the generic form of the drug, lamotrigine, from GSK's competitor Teva Pharmaceuticals ("Teva"). They filed a putative class action against GSK and Teva in the District of New Jersey alleging that Defendants committed antitrust violations arising out of their settlement agreement in a separate patent lawsuit.⁴⁶