“Your Honor, we are here to talk about damages,” stated Matthew D. Kent, attorney for Sandoz, during the opening statements. He vividly described the situation as “poison” infiltrating the market, influencing both patient access and physician prescription habits.
Sandoz Says Biopharma Biz Added ‘Poison’ To Market: Market Poison and its Aftermath
Kent argued that this market poisoning continued to deter doctors from prescribing the generic option, with the adverse effects still permeating the industry. According to Kent, the damages owed to Sandoz tally up to a substantial $168.4 million.
In contrast, Edward J. Bennett, representing United Therapeutics, attributed the poor uptake of Sandoz’s generic to ineffective marketing and administrative errors. He downplayed the alleged damages, suggesting a mere $8 million would be sufficient.
Sandoz Says Biopharma Biz Added ‘Poison’ To Market: A History of Legal Struggles
This legal confrontation is not the first between Sandoz and United Therapeutics. They previously clashed in 2015 over patent issues, which was resolved when Sandoz obtained a nonexclusive license to sell its generic version. However, the contention reignited as United Therapeutics allegedly employed new strategies to suppress the generic drug’s market presence, including restricting the distribution of essential drug delivery pumps through specialty pharmacies unless paired with their branded drug.
