Trial Trajectory: One Path Clears, Another Looms
Judge Seeborg on Tuesday clarified the direction of the case, stating that the looming May 19 trial would proceed only between the class and Hikma, given Jazz’s exit and unresolved claims by the opt-out insurers.
“The structure of that trial is presently uncertain,” he noted, emphasizing the court’s desire to avoid confusion and prejudice that could arise from blending multiple plaintiff groups. He underscored that evidence from opt-out plaintiffs — aimed at proving Jazz’s alleged monopoly — would only cloud the jury’s understanding.
“Ultimately, less is more,” Seeborg wrote in his order, favoring a “streamlined, relatively simpler trial” that allows each party their day in court without entangling overlapping claims.
Legal Armies Assembled: Counsel in the Spotlight
This heavyweight litigation has drawn a who’s who of legal talent:
-
The class is represented by attorneys from Girard Sharp LLP and Motley Rice LLC.
-
Opt-out insurers such as Humana, UnitedHealthcare, and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Florida are represented by Schneider Wallace, Lowey Dannenberg, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, and Zelle LLP.
-
Jazz Pharmaceuticals has enlisted Skaggs Faucette LLP and Williams & Connolly LLP.
-
Hikma Pharmaceuticals is defended by White & Case LLP.
The Big Picture: Monopoly Allegations Cast Long Shadows
The lawsuit has spotlighted long-standing concerns around “pay-for-delay” settlements, which critics argue hinder access to affordable generics and inflate drug prices. Xyrem, a blockbuster treatment for narcolepsy, has been at the center of these concerns due to its high cost and limited competition.
While Jazz exits stage left with a hefty price tag, the remaining players prepare for a courtroom showdown that could further reshape how the pharmaceutical industry navigates the thin line between patent protection and market manipulation.
One thing is certain: the drama over Xyrem is far from its final act.
