Lilly, Novo defeat antitrust lawsuit over GLP‑1 drug market

By Mike Scarcella

WASHINGTON, Aug 6 (Reuters) - Eli Lilly LLY.N and Novo Nordisk NOVOb.CO have persuaded a U.S. federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit by a compound drug maker that accused the pharmaceutical giants of illegally blocking access to customized versions of their blockbuster weight-loss medicines.

Here are the details:

• U.S. District Judge Micaela Alvarez of the federal court in San Antonio, Texas, in an order on Thursday granted requests by Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk to dismiss the lawsuit filed in January by compounding pharmacy Strive Specialties.

• Strive had alleged that the drug makers violated antitrust law by striking exclusive deals with major telehealth providers that prevented doctors on those platforms from prescribing compounded GLP‑1 drugs. The lawsuit claimed the deals limited physician and patient choice, suppressing competition in the market for GLP-1 drugs.

• GLP‑1 drugs such as Novo’s Ozempic and Wegovy and Eli Lilly’s Mounjaro and Zepbound have surged in demand. Compounding pharmacies replicate brand-name drugs during shortages by adjusting, mixing or combining ingredients to meet patient needs.

• Alvarez said Strive failed to plausibly allege a product market because compounded GLP-1 drugs are available only when a physician determines a branded drug cannot meet a patient's specific medical needs, making the products not reasonably interchangeable.

• The judge also found Strive did not adequately show how it was harmed, concluding that “antitrust laws protect competition — not individual competitors — and losses attributable to ordinary competitive forces do not suffice.”

• Strive, in a statement, said it was disappointed by the ruling, especially since some state attorneys general had questioned the drug makers' efforts to defeat the claims. Strive said it was confident of its position and was evaluating options, including an appeal.

• Lilly, in a statement, said “this meritless claim should have never been brought against Lilly” and that the court’s ruling “confirms that companies mass compounding tirzepatide are violating the law.”

• Novo, in a statement, said it is “pleased with the court's decision to dismiss all claims against Novo Nordisk” and that the company remains focused on its mission.

The case is Strive Specialties Inc v. Eli Lilly & Co and Novo Nordisk A/S et al, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, No. 5:26-cv-00155-MA.

For Strive: Joshua Bennett and Timothy Longman of Baker & Hostetler

For Novo: Andrew Lazerow and Ashley Bass of Covington & Burling

For Lilly: David Marriott and Amanda Reeves of Latham & Watkins

(Reporting by Mike Scarcella)