United States District Court, D. Minnesota
Adrienne Dresevic and Robert J Dindoffer, The Health Law
Partners and Elizabeth R. Odette and Kristen G. Marttila,
Lockridge Grindal Nauen PLLP, Counsel for Plaintiff.
Christine Lindblad, Meghan M.A. Hansen, Ellie J. Barragry and
Alex L. Rubenstein, Fox Rothschild LLP, Richard J. Malacko,
Malacko Law Office, Counsel for Defendant.
MICHAEL J. DAVIS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and
Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Tony Leung
dated January 23, 2019. Both Plaintiff and Defendant have
filed objections to the Report and Recommendation.
Physician Specialty Pharmacy, LLC (“PSP”) is a
specialty pharmacy located in Florida that has a substantial
number of customers in Alabama. Defendant Prime Therapeutics,
LLC (“Prime”) is a pharmacy benefits manager that
manages the prescription drug benefits for Blue Cross and
Blue Shield of Alabama. For several years, PSP filled
prescription claims for Prime's beneficiaries, but in
2015, Prime began to conduct a series of audits concerning
PSP's claims to Prime for payment. While the audits were
conducted, Prime refused to pay PSP for any prescriptions it
dispensed to a Prime member.
April 2016, Prime rejected over $300, 000 worth of claims
submitted by PSP for a number of reasons. Before PSP could
appeal the results of the first audit, and before the other
audits were complete, Prime terminated PSP from its pharmacy
network. Later, Prime completed the remaining audits and
rejected another $500, 000 worth of claims.
April 2017, Prime announced the creation of AllianceRx; a
joint venture with Walgreens to provide specialty and
mail-order pharmacy services.
April 2018, PSP brought this claim against Prime, asserting a
number of Minnesota and Florida state law claims, as well an
antitrust claim under federal law. Prime has moved to dismiss
the amended complaint, and PSP has moved, in limine,
to exclude a settlement demand letter pursuant to Fed.R.Evid.
Report and Recommendation
briefing and oral argument, the Magistrate Judge issued a
Report and Recommendation recommending the Court grant the
motion to dismiss the antitrust claim and to decline to
exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state
law claims. The Magistrate Judge further recommended that the
Court allow PSP the opportunity to submit an amended
complaint. Both parties have filed objections to portions of
the Report and Recommendation.