SUIT ALLEGES PURDUE PHARMA MONOPOLIZES OXYCODONE MARKET

A federal antitrust lawsuit filed by drug distributors against Purdue Pharma claims the drug company monopolized the OxyContin market by blocking generic versions of the drug with illegally obtained patents.

In a complaint recently filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the Harvard Drug Group said the drug company engaged in inequitable conduct when it applied for and received three key patents covering its pain treatment and, as a result, stifled generic competition.

Actions by Purdue, according to the complaint, hampered market entry of generic OxyContin that would have been available in July 2002. Direct purchasers of the drug would have saved money by substituting the cheaper generic for the more expensive brand drug, according to the complaint.

Harvard Special Counsel Robert Brown said the exclusive protections, cited in the complaint as patents '295, '041 and '912, would not have been issued "had it not been for the misrepresentations that took place here." For example, he said the drug company failed to provide the patent office with the scientific proof required to approve certain intentions of drug patents.

Purdue Special Counsel Tim Bannon said he was surprised by the legal action and downplayed the merits of the case because it draws on allegations previously vacated in federal district court. In addition, "while quoting the now-vacated district court decision, the complaint makes no mention of the appellate decision vacating it," Bannon said.