Ethan J. Barlieb

Current Cases

• Amarin Pharma, Inc.

  CASE CAPTION	In re: Vascepa Antitrust Litigation Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs
  COURT	United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
  CASE NUMBER	21-cv-12061-ZNQ
  JUDGE	Zahid Quraishi
  PLAINTIFF	Welfare Plan of The International Union of Operating Engineers Locals 137, 137A, 137B, 137C, 137R; Local 464A United Food and Commercial Workers Union Welfare Service Benefit Fund; Uniformed Fire Officers Association Family Protection Plan Local 854; Uniformed Fire Officers Association for Retired Fire Officers Family Protection Plan; Teamsters Health & Welfare Fund of Philadelphia and Vicinity; and Board of Trustees of the Heavy and General Laborers’ Local Unions 472 and 172 of NJ Welfare Fund
  DEFENDANTS	Amarin Pharma, Inc., Amarin Pharmaceuticals Ireland Limited, and Amarin Corporation PLC

  Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint alleging that, having pursued and lost patent infringement litigation against would-be generic competitors as well as exhausting every regulatory means to prevent and delay the launch of generic competitors, Amarin adopted an unlawful strategy to artificially extend its monopoly for it sole product Vascepa. By locking up every viable supplier of the key ingredient needed to manufacture generic Vascepa, Amarin boxed generic manufacturers out of the market. This scheme left Amarin free to continue charging supracompetitive prices and obtain the most profit it could out of Vascepa, at the expense of the Plaintiffs and other purchasers of the drug.

• Netflix, Inc. & Hulu, LLC

  CASE CAPTION	Borough of Longport and Township of Irvington v. Netflix, Inc. and Hulu, LLC
  COURT	United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
  CASE NUMBER	21-cv-15303-SRC
  JUDGE	Stanley R. Chesler
  PLAINTIFF	Borough of Longport and Township of Irvington
  DEFENDANTS	Netflix, Inc. and Hulu, LLC

  Plaintiffs filed a Class Action Complaint on August 13, 2021 alleging that, as providers of video programming and cable television service, Defendants were required to file an application for “individual certificates of approval or a system-wide franchise[.]” See N.J. Stat. Ann. § 48:5A-16. Defendants failed to apply for and obtain certificates of approval and municipal consents and/or a system-wide franchise. Defendants are providing cable television service throughout New Jersey without authorization, and in contravention of the New Jersey Cable Television Act (“CTA”). Such certificates of approval and/or franchise would have authorized Defendants to use public rights-of-way to provide their cable television service and video programming, provided that Defendants make payments to each municipality in which it provides service. The required payment is equal to a percentage of the gross revenues derived from subscription fees paid by subscribers in each municipality. Defendants were required to obtain certificates of approval and municipal consents and/or a system-wide franchise before providing cable television service and video programming in the Borough of Longport and Township of Irvington, and the other New Jersey municipalities. Defendants’ failure to obtain such approval and/or franchise did not relieve Defendants of the obligation to pay fees based on a percentage of their gross revenues derived from subscription fees paid by subscribers in each municipality. Defendants have failed to comply with N.J. Stat. Ann. § 48:5A-30 because they have failed to pay Plaintiffs and the other Class members the required fees. Plaintiffs seek to require Defendants to abide by the CTA, and pay what they owe to New Jersey municipalities.

• Michigan Federal Court Approves Settlement for Vehicle Owners in Ford Motor Co. Exhaust Fumes Consumer Litigation

  January 10, 2022