What is Teva's position in the generic price-fixing cases?
Teva admitted three narrow instances of bid-rigging in 2013–15 via one former employee; it disputes the states' far broader conspiracy allegations covering 100+ drugs and senior executives — the gap between those positions is exactly what a trial would test.
Teva has taken a two-track approach. In the criminal case it admitted limited conduct: three instances between 2013 and 2015 in which it agreed with competitors not to bid for a customer's business, involving pravastatin, clotrimazole and tobramycin. It attributed that conduct to a single former employee. In the civil state litigation, which alleges a far broader conspiracy involving senior executives and more than 100 drugs, Teva has not settled and disputes the allegations. It settled the related civil False Claims Act matter for $25 million without admitting wrongdoing, and said the settlements include no admission of wrongdoing. The gap between Teva's narrow admissions and the states' broad allegations is exactly what a trial would test. Because Teva is the largest US generic supplier, the outcome could have significant consequences for its finances and for how the industry operates.