Bayer defeats competition claims in US trial over flea and tick treatment
By Mike Scarcella
Aug 2 (Reuters) -A former unit of German life-sciences giant Bayer convinced a federal jury in California on Thursday that it did not block a pet care startup from competing in the retail market for a type of topical animal tick and flea treatment.
The jury determined in its second day of deliberations in San Jose that plaintiff Tevra Brands had not shown that there was a “relevant” market for the treatments under U.S. antitrust law. The verdict came after a two-week trial.
Tevra had urged the jury to hold Bayer liable for allegedly blocking generic competition for topical flea and tick treatments containing the insecticide imidacloprid as their active ingredient. Tevra accused Bayer of imposing deals on major pet retailers to only feature some Bayer products, causing Tevra to lose tens of millions of dollars in revenue.
Attorneys for Tevra did not immediately respond to a request for comment. They can appeal the verdict to the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Bayer sold Bayer Animal Health, a Bayer Healthcare unit, five years ago to Elanco Animal Health ELAN.N in a $7.6 billion deal.
Elanco in a statement welcomed the jury’s verdict and said retailers in the highly competitive pet health market are able to carry a wide variety of products. Bayer denied any wrongdoing.
Hours after the verdict was announced, Tevra sued Elanco in California federal court in a new lawsuit mirroring the allegations in the Bayer case.
Elanco was separately hit with a consumer lawsuit on Wednesdayaccusing it of suppressing competition for its topical flea and tick treatment. That case in Indiana focused in part on Tevra’s effort to sell some of its products at pet specialty stores.
Tevra filed its lawsuit against Bayer Healthcare in 2019, challenging a discount it said Bayer provided to some pet specialty retailers and distributors to exclusively carry its products.
“Tevra went into the marketplace hoping for nothing more than a fair opportunity to sell their product, and they were denied that opportunity because of Bayer’s actions,” Daniel Owen, a lawyer for Tevra, told the jury. He said Bayer's conduct caused consumers to pay higher prices.
Bayer's lawyer Daniel Asimow countered that Tevra’s market definition was too narrow, and that competition should be considered broader than one product Bayer sells versus a generic from Tevra.
Asimow also said Tevra was slow to get to market and had poor relationships with retailers. Bayer competed “vigorously, but ethically” and its discount program was short-term and voluntary, Asimow told the jury.
The case is Tevra Brands LLC v. Bayer Healthcare LLC, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, No. 5:19-cv-04312.
For Tevra: Daniel Owen of Polsinelli
For Bayer: Daniel Asimow and Sonia Pfaffenroth of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer
Read more:
Advantix maker Elanco hit with price-fixing lawsuit over flea, tick products
Bayer heads to trial in US antitrust lawsuit over flea, tick medication
Reporting by Mike Scarcella
免責聲明: XM Group提供線上交易平台的登入和執行服務，允許個人查看和/或使用網站所提供的內容，但不進行任何更改或擴展其服務和訪問權限，並受以下條款與條例約束：（i）條款與條例；（ii）風險提示；（iii）完全免責聲明。網站內部所提供的所有資訊，僅限於一般資訊用途。請注意，我們所有的線上交易平台內容並不構成，也不被視為進入金融市場交易的邀約或邀請 。金融市場交易會對您的投資帶來重大風險。
所有缐上交易平台所發佈的資料，僅適用於教育/資訊類用途，不包含也不應被視爲適用於金融、投資稅或交易相關諮詢和建議，或是交易價格紀錄，或是任何金融商品或非應邀途徑的金融相關優惠的交易邀約或邀請。
本網站的所有XM和第三方所提供的内容，包括意見、新聞、研究、分析、價格其他資訊和第三方網站鏈接，皆爲‘按原狀’，並作爲一般市場評論所提供，而非投資建議。請理解和接受，所有被歸類為投資研究範圍的相關内容，並非爲了促進投資研究獨立性，而根據法律要求所編寫，而是被視爲符合營銷傳播相關法律與法規所編寫的内容。請確保您已詳讀並完全理解我們的非獨立投資研究提示和風險提示資訊，相關詳情請點擊 這裡查看。
