State AGs Seek to Block the Deal
A coalition of state attorneys general filed objections in May, arguing the agreement is overly broad and threatens state consumer protection powers. The states claim it preempts their ability to seek relief for harmed residents and favors insurers over individual consumers.
Sandoz, however, fired back Tuesday, saying the states have no standing to object, as they are not part of the settlement class. In its filing, Sandoz argued the objections represent a misguided attempt to override private class action settlements and interfere with established legal precedent.
“The States’ objections are driven by a paternalistic desire to control private class action settlements,” Sandoz asserted. “This would give states an effective veto over all class settlements involving consumers.”
The company emphasized that courts have long upheld the ability of private settlements to release overlapping claims, so long as they don’t block sovereign enforcement actions — which, Sandoz contends, this deal does not.
