Eli Lilly seeks court relief from fines in battle with contract pharmacies

Eli Lilly has filed a motion asking a federal court to stop the government from placing monetary penalties on the drugmaker for its refusal to provide 340B discounts to contract pharmacies. 

The motion, filed May 20, claims that the Health Resources and Service Administration was bowing to political pressure from Congress to "come down" on drugmakers when acting Administrator Diana Espinosa sent a letter May 17 ordering Eli Lilly and five other drugmakers to immediately begin offering 340B discounts to hospitals that use contract pharmacies. The letter stated the drugmakers have until June 1 to release a plan on how to resume giving the discounts. 

The letter was a "political attempt to assuage members of Congress and their constituents," Eli Lilly argued. The drugmaker is requesting that the federal judge impose a restraining order and preliminary injunction to halt any penalties until a court case between the drugmaker and HHS is resolved. 

Eli Lilly, along with Sanofi and AstraZeneca, sued HHS in January over an advisory opinion released by HHS in December stating the drugmakers violated the 340B statute. The drugmakers argue the advisory opinion is unlawful and requires them to honor a practice that isn't covered under the 340B statute. 

Eli Lilly said it continues to offer 340B discounts to 100 percent of covered entities, but won't provide discounts to contract pharmacies as a matter of course. 

Read the full motion filed by Eli Lilly here

Copyright © 2024 Becker's Healthcare. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Cookie Policy. Linking and Reprinting Policy.

 

Featured Whitepapers

Featured Webinars