North Jackson Pharmacy, Inc. v. Caremark Rx, Inc.

385 F. Supp. 2d 740 (2005) United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois 2005-08-12

civil; putative class action by independent pharmacies against pharmacy benefits manager; after denial of 12(b)(6), defendant's Rule 16 issue-narrowing motion to fix rule of reason (not per se) as the standard for Claim I; granted (result: not-decided)

Facts

  1. 1 Concerted action ("contract, combination ... or conspiracy") between separate economic decisionmakers satisfied pleaded
    Claim I asserts a conspiracy between Plan Sponsors, using Caremark as their “common agent,” to fix the prices paid independent pharmacies for dispensing prescription drugs to Plan Subscribers.
  2. 1 Concerted action ("contract, combination ... or conspiracy") between separate economic decisionmakers satisfied pleaded
    Under United States v. Masonite Corp., 316 U.S. 265, 276, 62 S.Ct. 1070, 86 L.Ed. 1461 (1942) the Plan Sponsors’ knowledge of and acquiescence in that common strategy could reasonably support a finding of conspiracy under Section 1.
  3. 1 Concerted action ("contract, combination ... or conspiracy") between separate economic decisionmakers satisfied pleaded
    For purposes of Pharmacy’s common agent claim, the relevant agreement is that alleged to exist among the Plan Sponsors. And that agreement, between firms that would normally compete with each other for the purchase of prescription drugs, may fairly be said to constitute a horizontal restraint.