Amneal asks court to block Colorado's free allergy pen program
By Brendan Pierson
Sept 23 (Reuters) -Amneal Pharmaceuticals AMRX.O has sued Colorado in an effort to block a state law requiring it to provide free generic EpiPens to pharmacies.
In a complaint filed on Friday in federal court in Denver, Colorado, New Jersey-based Amneal said that the law, which was passed last year and took effect in January, was an illegal taking of its property under the 5th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
The law aims to bring down the often high costs of auto-injectors like Viatris' VTRS.O EpiPen, handheld devices that treat life-threatening severe allergic reactions by automatically injecting a dose of the drug epinephrine.
It requires all health insurance plans that cover auto-injectors to provide them at a cost of no more than $60 for a two-pack, a requirement that Amneal is not challenging.
The law also requires pharmacies to provide the injectors with the same $60 price cap to people whose insurance does not cover them, and manufacturers in turn to provide the pharmacies with a free replacement or reimbursement for each injector sold under that requirement.
The company's generic version of the device Adrenaclick, which was approved in 2018, generally costs more than $100 without insurance, while a pack of brand-name EpiPens can cost as much as $700.
Amneal said it has had to replace 304 injectors since the program began.
"Colorado's reimburse-or-resupply requirement plainly effects an unconstitutional, 'per se physical taking' of Amneal's personal property in violation of the Fifth Amendment," it said, asking the court to issue an order blocking enforcement of the law.
The office of Colorado Attorney General Philip Weiser declined to comment.
Viatris drew harsh criticism from U.S. lawmakers in 2016 for increasing the price of EpiPens sixfold in less than a decade.
It reached a $465 million settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice in 2017 over claims that it used anticompetitive tactics to drive up the price, and in 2022 agreed to pay $264 million to settle related private litigation.
Pfizer, which manufactured the product for Viatris, has also reached settlements with private plaintiffs totaling almost $400 million.
The case is Amneal Pharmaceuticals v. Weiser, U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, No. 1:24-cv-02609.
For Amneal: Jay Lefkowitz of Kirkland & Ellis
For Colorado: not yet available
Read more:
Mylan, U.S. finalize $465 million EpiPen settlement
EpiPen antitrust litigation settled; Viatris to pay $264 million
Pfizer to pay $50 mln to settle drug wholesalers' EpiPen antitrust claims
(Reporting By Brendan Pierson in New York)
</body></html>Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
