Summary
Becton, Dickinson and Company (BDX) filed an 8-K on October 6, 2010, to report on an antitrust litigation matter. The company had previously entered into a $45 million settlement agreement in April 2009 related to the "In re Hypodermic Products Antitrust Litigation". This settlement was intended to resolve direct purchaser claims concerning certain BD products. However, the court has denied the motion to approve the settlement. The court ruled that hospital plaintiffs, not distributor plaintiffs, are considered the direct purchasers eligible to pursue damages under federal antitrust laws for specific product sales. The settlement agreement remains in effect, but is subject to termination provisions and potential appellate review. Importantly, BDX is not adjusting its previously recognized provision for this settlement at this time, indicating the company's ongoing assessment of the situation.
Key Highlights
- 1BDX reported on the status of the "In re Hypodermic Products Antitrust Litigation" settlement.
- 2A $45 million settlement agreement was previously reached with purchaser plaintiffs in April 2009.
- 3The court denied the motion to approve the settlement agreement on September 30, 2010.
- 4The court ruled that hospital plaintiffs are the direct purchasers, not the distributors, for certain claims.
- 5The settlement agreement remains in effect, subject to termination provisions.
- 6The court's order may be subject to appellate review.
- 7BDX is not currently adjusting the provision recognized for the settlement in Q2 2009.