An antitrust ruling unsealed on Wednesday has paved the way for life-sciences behemoth Bayer to confront a lawsuit alleging anti-competitive behavior in the market for tick and flea meds for pets. U.S. District Judge Beth Freeman, presiding over the case in San Jose, California, deemed that the plaintiff, pet products company Tevra, presented adequate evidence to warrant a trial.
According to Reuters, Tevra accuses a former unit of Bayer, a German multinational corporation, of engaging in maneuvers designed to stifle competition for alternative tick and flea treatments. The lawsuit contends that Bayer collaborated with retailers and distributors to impede the entry of Tevra’s generic, cost-effective pet medications into the market.
Bayer, however, denies any wrongdoing. The conglomerate deferred requests for comment on the recent ruling to Elanco Animal Health, which acquired Bayer’s animal health business in a $7.6 billion transaction five years ago.
Elanco, not named as a defendant in the lawsuit, refrained from immediate comment regarding the ruling. Nonetheless, in a partial victory for Bayer, Judge Freeman stipulated that the plaintiffs could not pursue damages beyond July 31, 2020, the date Bayer exited the animal health market.
The trial for this high-stakes case is slated for July, promising to shed further light on the intricate dynamics of the pet medication industry. According to an expert for the plaintiffs cited by Reuters, Americans annually expend billions of dollars on tick and flea treatments for their beloved pets, underscoring the significance of the legal showdown between Tevra and Bayer.
Omaha-based Tevra initiated legal proceedings against Bayer in 2019, seeking compensation exceeding $76 million for alleged lost profits stemming from the sale of its generic topical imidacloprid, a key ingredient in tick and flea treatment for both cats and dogs.
Source: Reuters
Featured News
Electrolux Fined €44.5 Million in French Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Indian Antitrust Body Raids Alcohol Giants Amid Price Collusion Probe
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Attorneys Seek $525 Million in Fees in NCAA Settlement Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Italy’s Competition Watchdog Ends Investigation into Booking.com
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Minnesota Judge Approves $2.4 Million Hormel Settlement in Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand