Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, ANTITRUST NEWS: Russian generic pharma company alleges scheme to block cancer drugs from U.S. market, (Jun 8, 2016)

By Jody Coultas, J.D.

Russian pharmaceutical company BIOCAD JSC has filed suit against F. Hoffman La-Roche Ltd., Genentech Inc., and R-Farm JSC for allegedly engaging in an anticompetitive scheme to prevent BIOCAD from entering the U.S. market for cancer drugs and to destroy BIOCAD’s business in Russia (BIOCAD JSC v. F. Hoffman La-Roche Ltd., June 6, 2016).

F. Hoffman La-Roche (Roche) manufactures and sells three blockbuster drugs used to treat cancer marketed and sold in the U.S. by Roche’s fully-owned subsidiary under the brand names Avastin®, Herceptin®, and Rituxan®. These three drugs earn Roche over $20 billion per year. BIOCAD was able to re-create biosimilars of all three of Roche’s drugs and expected to enter the U.S. market when Roche’s exclusivity rights expire in 2018 and 2019.

BIOCAD alleged that Roche and other defendants engaged in an anticompetitive scheme to destroy its competing business that deliberately targeted, and severely burdened, not only BIOCAD, but also consumers and cancer patients in the United States.

According to the complaint, Roche engaged in predatory and discriminatory pricing; limited output followed by illegal tying arrangements; registered a non-existent drug through a third party; participated in auctions and contests with fraudulent bids; and limited the distribution network in the U.S. in anticipation of generic entry and with the intent to restrain trade. Roche allegedly dropped its prices below any justifiable level, and fully financed operations and profits of a third party distributor in Russia to put BIOCAD out of business.

Roche’s allegedly anticompetitive conduct in Russia was similar to its worldwide policy to destroy generic competition and prevent cheaper drugs from entering the U.S. market, according to BIOCAD.

The compliant includes claims brought under the Sherman Act, Clayton Act, and Robinson-Patman Act, as well as claims related statutes and common law. BIOCAD allegedly suffered injury to their business and property, including by being deprived of the ability to effectively compete in the United States. BIOCAD seeks damages, treble damages, pre- and post-judgment interest, attorney fees and costs, and other relief that the court may deem proper.

The case is No. 1:16-cv-4226.

Attorneys: Albert Feinstein and Rika Khurdayan (Feinstein & Partners, PLLC) for BIOCAD JSC.

Companies: BIOCAD JSC; F. Hoffman La-Roche Ltd.; R-Farm JSC

News: Antitrust NewYorkNews