Your rights may be affected by proposed settlements in a class action lawsuit, In re Namenda Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Litigation, pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Court”) involving Namenda XR, Namenda IR, and its AB-rated generic equivalents. The lawsuit alleges that defendants Actavis, plc and its wholly owned subsidiary Forest Laboratories, LLC (jointly, “Actavis”); and Merz GmbH & Co. KgaA, Merz Pharmaceuticals GmbH, and Merz Pharma GmbH & Co. KgaA (collectively, “Merz”) (collectively, “Brand Defendants”) and Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cobalt Laboratories, Inc., Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd., and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (collectively, “Teva”);; Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd. and Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Inc. (jointly, “Dr. Reddy’s”); Wockhardt Limited and Wockhardt USA LLC (jointly, “Wockhardt”); Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., and Upsher-Smith Laboratories, LLC (collectively, “Amneal/Sun/Upsher-Smith” and with Teva, Dr. Reddy’s, and Wockhardt, collectively, (collectively, “Generic Defendants”) harmed competition and violated state antitrust, consumer protection and deceptive trade practices laws, and engaged in inequitable conduct in the United States. The lawsuit claims that the defendants engaged in a monopolization scheme that kept generic versions of Namenda off the market and made Namenda prices higher than they otherwise would have been. The defendants deny these claims. No one is claiming that Namenda is unsafe.

The Brand Defendants Settlement provides that the Brand Defendants will pay $54,400,000.00 into a settlement fund to pay TPPs and any attorneys’ fees, costs, expenses, incentive award ordered by the Court, and notice and settlement administration costs.

The Generic Defendants Settlement provides that the Generic Defendants will pay $2,038,000.00 into a settlement fund to pay consumers and TPPs and any attorneys’ fees, costs, expenses, incentive award ordered by the Court, and notice and settlement administration costs. The allocable portion of the Generic Defendants’ settlement is substantially less than the expenses (expert witness fees, etc.) that Class Counsel have incurred from the start of the litigation to the last Generic Defendants Settlement date (July 31, 2020) in connection with the continuing prosecution of this matter on behalf of members of the Generic Defendants Class and members of the Brand Defendants Class and the cost to disseminate notice to the class. Therefore, due to the additional costs of notice, and related notice administration and claims administration, the amount allocated to the Generic Defendants Settlement may not warrant distribution to the Generic Defendants Class, and instead would pour over into the Third-Party Payor Pool (defined in the Plan of Allocation) and shall be used to pay Qualifying Claims made against that Pool.

Each settlement provides a release of all claims by members of the Classes. This means that if you remain in the classes you cannot sue the Defendants in another lawsuit relating to the claims in this lawsuit. Complete details of the settlements, including full release language, can be found in the settlement agreements which are available on the Court Documents page of this website.

The Court will hold a Final Approval Hearing at 10:00 a.m. EDT on March 23, 2023, at the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, located at 500 Pearl Street, Courtroom 24A, New York, NY 10007. The hearing may be moved to a different date or time without additional notice, so it is a good idea to check at www.InReNamendaIndirectAntitrustLitigation.com for updates. At this hearing, the Court will consider whether the settlements are fair, reasonable, and adequate. The Court will also consider any request by Class Counsel for attorneys’ fees and expenses and for the incentive award for the class representative. If there are objections, the Court will consider them at that time. After the hearing, the Court will decide whether to approve the settlements.

Your rights may be affected by proposed settlements in a class action lawsuit, In re Namenda Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Litigation, pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Court”) involving Namenda XR, Namenda IR, and its AB-rated generic equivalents. The lawsuit alleges that defendants Actavis, plc and its wholly owned subsidiary Forest Laboratories, LLC (jointly, “Actavis”); and Merz GmbH & Co. KgaA, Merz Pharmaceuticals GmbH, and Merz Pharma GmbH & Co. KgaA (collectively, “Merz”) (collectively, “Brand Defendants”) and Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cobalt Laboratories, Inc., Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd., and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (collectively, “Teva”);; Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd. and Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Inc. (jointly, “Dr. Reddy’s”); Wockhardt Limited and Wockhardt USA LLC (jointly, “Wockhardt”); Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., and Upsher-Smith Laboratories, LLC (collectively, “Amneal/Sun/Upsher-Smith” and with Teva, Dr. Reddy’s, and Wockhardt, collectively, (collectively, “Generic Defendants”) harmed competition and violated state antitrust, consumer protection and deceptive trade practices laws, and engaged in inequitable conduct in the United States. The lawsuit claims that the defendants engaged in a monopolization scheme that kept generic versions of Namenda off the market and made Namenda prices higher than they otherwise would have been. The defendants deny these claims. No one is claiming that Namenda is unsafe.

The Brand Defendants Settlement provides that the Brand Defendants will pay $54,400,000.00 into a settlement fund to pay TPPs and any attorneys’ fees, costs, expenses, incentive award ordered by the Court, and notice and settlement administration costs.

The Generic Defendants Settlement provides that the Generic Defendants will pay $2,038,000.00 into a settlement fund to pay consumers and TPPs and any attorneys’ fees, costs, expenses, incentive award ordered by the Court, and notice and settlement administration costs. The allocable portion of the Generic Defendants’ settlement is substantially less than the expenses (expert witness fees, etc.) that Class Counsel have incurred from the start of the litigation to the last Generic Defendants Settlement date (July 31, 2020) in connection with the continuing prosecution of this matter on behalf of members of the Generic Defendants Class and members of the Brand Defendants Class and the cost to disseminate notice to the class. Therefore, due to the additional costs of notice, and related notice administration and claims administration, the amount allocated to the Generic Defendants Settlement may not warrant distribution to the Generic Defendants Class, and instead would pour over into the Third-Party Payor Pool (defined in the Plan of Allocation) and shall be used to pay Qualifying Claims made against that Pool.

Each settlement provides a release of all claims by members of the Classes. This means that if you remain in the classes you cannot sue the Defendants in another lawsuit relating to the claims in this lawsuit. Complete details of the settlements, including full release language, can be found in the settlement agreements which are available on the Court Documents page of this website.

The Court will hold a Final Approval Hearing at 10:00 a.m. EDT on March 23, 2023, at the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, located at 500 Pearl Street, Courtroom 24A, New York, NY 10007. The hearing may be moved to a different date or time without additional notice, so it is a good idea to check at www.InReNamendaIndirectAntitrustLitigation.com for updates. At this hearing, the Court will consider whether the settlements are fair, reasonable, and adequate. The Court will also consider any request by Class Counsel for attorneys’ fees and expenses and for the incentive award for the class representative. If there are objections, the Court will consider them at that time. After the hearing, the Court will decide whether to approve the settlements.