“Although there were many jurisdictions that were appropriate given the defendants involved, we believe that Rhode Island is certainly an appropriate venue for the litigation of these cases. We look forward to moving the case along and ultimately achieving a positive result for not only our client, but effecting real change in the industry throughout the United States.” Eric Artrip
By Lauren Berg
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on Wednesday consolidated in Rhode Island litigation alleging that GoodRx conspired with pharmacy benefit managers, including CVS Caremark and Express Scripts, to suppress reimbursements to independent pharmacies for dispensing generic prescription medications.
The panel determined that the cases — which have been filed in the Central District of California, the Eastern District of New York, Connecticut and Rhode Island — should be consolidated and transferred to the District of Rhode Island, noting in its brief order that it is a “relatively underutilized transferee district” that currently has no pending multidistrict litigation.
The district will also serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses, the panel said, adding that CVS Caremark is headquartered there.
Since October, more than a dozen proposed class actions have been filed alleging essentially the same conspiracy: that GoodRx and four pharmacy benefit managers — CVS Caremark, Express Scripts, MedImpact Healthcare Systems and Navitus Health Solutions — have used GoodRx’s “integrated savings program” to engage in anticompetitive conduct, according to the order.
Specifically, the plaintiffs, which are independent pharmacies and nonprofit associations of pharmacies, allege the program involves an agreement between the PBMs and GoodRx to use GoodRx’s price-aggregating algorithm to suppress the costs that PBMs pay for generic prescription medications dispensed by independent pharmacies.
The plaintiffs all seek to represent nationwide classes of “independent pharmacies that have been reimbursed for generic prescription medications pursuant to the integrated savings program,” the order states.
All the suits name GoodRx as a defendant and all but two name the four PBMs as defendants. All plaintiffs assert claims of illegal price-fixing and restraint of trade in violation of the Sherman Act.
Eric J. Artrip of Mastando & Artrip LLC — who represents plaintiffs C&H Pharmacy, Propst Discount Drugs and Reeves Drug Store — told Law360 on Wednesday, “Although there were many jurisdictions that were appropriate given the defendants involved, we believe that Rhode Island is certainly an appropriate venue for the litigation of these cases.”
“We look forward to moving the case along and ultimately achieving a positive result for not only our client, but effecting real change in the industry throughout the United States,” he added.”
