Federal Trade Commission v. Lundbeck, Inc.

650 F.3d 1236 (2011)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
F
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Federal Trade Commission v. Lundbeck, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
650 F.3d 1236 (2011)

Facts

Lundbeck, Inc. (Lundbeck) (defendant) acquired the rights to two drugs, Indocin IV and NeoProfen. At the time, Indocin IV and NeoProfen were the only federally approved drugs for treating patent ductus arteriosus (PDA), a life-threatening heart condition affecting babies. Although both drugs were used to treat PDA, the two drugs did not feature similar compositions and had unique side effects. After acquiring the two drugs, Lundbeck dramatically increased the price of each drug. Both drugs were distributed in hospitals during inpatient care, with neonatologists responsible for determining which drug a patient would receive. Lundbeck stopped promoting Indocin and focused on NeoProfen due to Indocin’s vulnerability to generic competition. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (plaintiff) brought a complaint against Lundbeck, alleging that Lundbeck’s purchase of the two drugs constituted an antitrust violation. At trial, Lundbeck provided testimony from seven neonatologists that the choice between Indocin IV and NeoProfen was based solely on medical advantages and disadvantages without regard to cost. The district court determined that the FTC had failed to show that the two drugs competed in the same product market and consequently dismissed for failure to identify a relevant market. The FTC appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Benton, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 804,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Antitrust

Key Terms