Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
I

In re Lorazepam & Clorazepate Antitrust Litigation

289 F.3d 98 (2002)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re Lorazepam & Clorazepate Antitrust Litigation

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
289 F.3d 98 (2002)

  • Written by Heather Whittemore, JD

Facts

Mylan Laboratories, Inc. (Mylan) (defendant) manufactured the antianxiety drugs lorazepam and clorazepate (the drugs). The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) settled an antitrust case with Mylan on behalf of indirect purchasers of the drugs. After the FTC settlement, a class of direct purchasers of the drugs (the direct purchasers) (plaintiffs) filed a class-action lawsuit in federal district court against Mylan under § 4 of the Clayton Act, alleging that Mylan’s actions regarding the drugs violated federal antitrust laws. Mylan moved to dismiss the case, arguing that the FTC settlement made on behalf of indirect purchasers precluded recovery by the direct purchasers. Mylan relied on the indirect-purchaser doctrine established by Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, arguing that this case established a policy that only one class of purchasers may recover on alleged antitrust violations. Mylan also argued that the direct-purchaser class improperly contained both direct and indirect purchasers. The district court denied Mylan’s motion and certified the direct-purchaser class. Mylan appealed the class-certification decision under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f) (Rule 23(f)).

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Rogers, 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 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools 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 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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 832,000 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
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 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

Federal Courts

Key Terms