Summary
Becton, Dickinson and Company (BDX) filed an 8-K on June 5, 2012, to report a significant development in the "In re Hypodermic Products Antitrust Litigation." The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reversed a lower court's decision, ruling that distributor plaintiffs, rather than hospital plaintiffs, are the direct purchasers eligible to seek damages under federal antitrust laws for certain BDX product sales. This appellate ruling impacts a previously announced settlement agreement between BDX and certain purchaser plaintiffs, including distributors, dated April 27, 2009. The settlement, valued at $45 million, was contingent upon a determination that distributors are the direct purchasers. While the appellate decision supports this condition, the settlement is still subject to final approval by the district court and remains in effect, pending any applicable termination provisions. The settlement seeks a release from all potential class members regarding direct purchaser claims.
Key Highlights
- 1The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reversed a district court decision in the "In re Hypodermic Products Antitrust Litigation."
- 2The appellate court ruled that distributor plaintiffs, not hospital plaintiffs, are the direct purchasers eligible to pursue damages under federal antitrust laws.
- 3This ruling is a key condition for a previously announced settlement agreement between BDX and certain purchaser plaintiffs (including distributors).
- 4The settlement agreement, dated April 27, 2009, involves a payment of $45 million by BDX.
- 5The $45 million settlement is in exchange for a release of direct purchaser claims under federal antitrust laws related to specified products and acts.
- 6The settlement remains in effect but is subject to termination provisions and requires approval from the district court.
- 7The release of claims in the settlement does not cover potential class members who affirmatively opt out.