According to the Transfer Order dated August 3, 2017 and filed in our court on August 4, 2017: “This litigation . . . involve[s] allegations of anticompetitive conduct or unfair methods of competition by one or more Mylan entities with respect to the EpiPen, a spring-loaded injector marketed by Mylan that delivers a pre-measured and pre-loaded amount of epinephrine for the emergency treatment of anaphylaxis. . . . These actions share factual questions arising from Mylan’s alleged dominance in the market for epinephrine auto-injectors and recent increases of the price for the EpiPen. Plaintiffs allege anticompetitive conduct including, among other things:  engaging in a ‘hard switch’ and selling EpiPens only in packs of two; entering into discount agreements with schools that were conditioned on the schools not purchasing competing products; securing multiple overlapping patents on minor changes to the EpiPen and engaging in ‘sham’ patent litigation to forestall generic competition; and paying excessive rebates to commercial insurance companies, pharmaceutical benefits managers, and state-based Medicaid agencies conditioned on those companies and agencies not reimbursing the use of competing products.  Plaintiffs assert claims for violation of federal and state antitrust laws, as well as state consumer protection laws.” Doc. 1 at 1, 2 (footnote omitted). This web page provides a brief summary of the case along with selected documents filed by the parties.  To view all of the records in the case, please use the court's Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER).  For more information on PACER and how to access court records, including court transcripts, CLICK HERE.