Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. has won a significant $406.8 million judgment in its antitrust lawsuit against Amgen Inc., following a jury verdict last month that found Amgen engaged in illegal price undercutting through a bundling scheme involving Regeneron's cholesterol drug Praluent and two of Amgen’s blockbuster medications.

U.S. District Judge Jennifer L. Hall issued the judgment Monday, endorsing the jury’s finding that punitive damages of $271.2 million were warranted for Regeneron’s claim of tortious interference. This amount, combined with $135.6 million in compensatory damages awarded by the jury in May, brings the total damages award to more than triple the initial compensatory figure.

Amgen had sought to limit the damages award to $271.2 million, arguing for a single damages form covering all claims combined. Following the verdict, Amgen indicated it would likely appeal the ruling. Regeneron emphasized that if any count of the verdict is overturned on appeal, Amgen may push for a new trial on damages, despite the same evidence and arguments being presented for all counts.

The jury sided with Regeneron on nearly all counts, determining that Amgen illegally bundled its cholesterol drug Repatha — a direct competitor to Praluent — with substantial rebates on Amgen’s higher-priced anti-inflammatory drugs Enbrel and Otezla. This practice effectively forced pharmacy benefit managers to purchase Repatha at nearly double the price of Praluent, violating antitrust laws.

The verdict also found Amgen liable for monopolization, unreasonable restraint of trade, tortious interference with prospective business relations, and violations of California’s Cartwright Act and New York’s Donnelly Act.

In response to the verdict, Amgen maintained it has “always competed fairly and in compliance with the antitrust laws,” asserting that Regeneron had “every opportunity to compete in the marketplace.” Regeneron criticized Amgen’s bundling strategy as a scheme that “shut out an innovative therapy … not based on clinical merit or price.”

Legal representation for Regeneron includes Jonathan D. Polkes and Adam B. Banks of White & Case LLP, David E. Wilks and Scott B. Czerwonka of the Wilks Law Firm, Jessica L. Falk, Robert Niles-Weed and Rachel Williams of Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, and Eric S. Hochstadt of Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP.

Amgen is represented by Eric J. Stock, Ben A. Sherwood, Leesa Haspel, Kate Swisher, Stephen Weissman, Richard J. Doren, Samuel Liversidge, Betty X. Yang, Ashley E. Johnson and John Adams of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP, and Melanie K. Sharp, James L. Higgins, and Stephanie N. Vangellow of Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor LLP.

Case Reference:
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Amgen Inc., Case No. 1:22-cv-00697, U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware.