Author name: tcllaw

We represented Giant Eagle in an antitrust action alleging that Cephalon paid its generic competitors to stay off the market with their competing generic versions of Provigil, and we successfully negotiated an individual settlement for Giant Eagle.

Giant Eagle, Inc. v. Cephalon, Inc. (E.D. Pa.) Read More »

We represented direct purchasers in a class action alleging that Pfizer delayed generic competition for its successful pain reliever Celebrex, by making misrepresentations and omitting material facts before the USPTO in order to obtain a reissue patent covering Celebrex, and that asserting to the patent prevented generic versions of Celebrex from entering the United States market.

In re Celebrex Antitrust Litigation (E.D.Va.) Read More »

T: 212.931.0704 | E: Since joining the firm in January 2023, Joshua Hall has taken an active role in the discovery phase of Hogan v., Inc. (N.D. Ill.), which alleges the defendant violated the rights of consumers with respect to their biometric information. Mr. Hall began his litigation career in consumer debt litigation

Joshua Hall, Associate Read More »

We represent direct purchasers of the drug Zetia alleging that defendants conspired to delay launch of cheaper generic versions of ezetimibe. As members of the Executive Committee and active members of the trial team, we helped achieve a successful settlement for our clients at the beginning of the trial.

In re Zetia Antitrust Litigation (E.D.Va.) Read More »

As a member of the Executive Committee, we represent direct purchasers of Effexor XR who were prevented from substituting less expensive generic versions of Effexor XR because of Defendants’ alleged scheme to monopolize the market, that included committing fraud to secure a patent and making a large payment to a generic competitor to delay the

In re Effexor XR Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litigation (D.N.J.) Read More »

TCL played a key role on the Executive Committee guiding this case on behalf of purchasers of Lidoderm alleging that the defendants conspired to delay launch ofless expensive versions of lidocaine patches. Along with our co-counsel, we recovered a $166 million settlement for direct purchasers on the eve of trial.

In re Lidoderm Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal.) Read More »

As class counsel we played an active role through trial preparation in this case which alleged that the defendants conspired to keep generic diabetes medicine off the market. The case resulted in a $453 million settlement–one of the largest in the history of generic-delay cases.

In re Glumetza Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal.) Read More »

We represent a class of consumers who purchased items through Amazon’s “Buy Box”, through which 90% of’s sales are made. Plaintiffs allege that Amazon violates the antitrust laws by tying a seller’s access to placement in Amazon’s Buy Box on the seller’s purchasing fulfillment services from Amazon. This arrangement allegedly eliminates competition in the

Hogan, et al v. (W.D. Wa.) Read More »

Scroll to Top