`
`UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
`FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
`1100 East Main Street, Suite 501, Richmond, Virginia 23219
`
`www.ca4.uscourts.gov
`
`November 11, 2020
`
`No. 20-2184
`(2:18-md-02836-RBS-DEM)
`
`In re: ZETIA (EZETIMIBE) ANTITRUST LITIGATION
`
`--------------------------------
`
`FWK HOLDINGS, LLC; CESAR CASTILLO, INC., individually and on behalf of
`all those similarly situated; ROCHESTER DRUG COOPERATIVE, INC., ON
`BEHALF OF ITSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED
`
`Plaintiffs – Appellees
`
`v.
`
`MERCK & COMPANY, INCORPORATED; MERCK SHARP & DOHME
`CORPORATION; SCHERING PLOUGH CORPORATION; SCHERING
`CORPORATION; MSP SINGAPORE CO. LLC; GLENMARK
`PHARMACEUTICALS, LTD.; GLENMARK GENERICS INC., USA
`
`Defendants - Appellants
`
`DIRECT PURCHASER CLASS PLAINTIFFS - APPELLEES’
`MOTION TO EXPEDITE
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 2 of 19
`
`William H. Monroe, Jr.
`(VSB No. 27441)
`Marc C. Greco (VSB No. 41496)
`Kip A. Harbison (VSB No. 38648)
`Michael A. Glasser (VSB No. 17651)
`Glasser and Glasser, P.L.C.
`Crown Center, Suite 600
`580 East Main Street
`Norfolk, VA 23510
`Telephone: (757) 625-6787
`Facsimile: (757) 625-5959
`bill@glasserlaw.com
`marcg@glasserlaw.com
`kip@glasserlaw.com
`michael@glasserlaw.com
`
`Local Counsel for Direct Purchaser
`Plaintiffs FWK Holdings, LLC,
`Rochester Drug Cooperative, Inc.,
`Cesar Castillo, Inc. and the Proposed
`Direct Purchaser Class
`
`David F. Sorensen
`Ellen T. Noteware
`Nicholas Urban
`Berger Montague PC
`1818 Market Street, Suite 3600
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`Telephone: (215) 875-3000
`Facsimile: (215) 875-4604
`dsorensen@bm.net
`enoteware@bm.net
`nurban@bm.net
`
`Counsel for Rochester Drug
`Cooperative, Inc. and the Proposed
`Direct Purchaser Class
`
`Thomas M. Sobol
`Kristen A. Johnson
`Hannah Schwarzschild
`Erin C. Burns
`Bradley Vettraino
`Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP
`55 Cambridge Parkway, Suite 301
`Cambridge, MA 02142
`Telephone: (617) 482-3700
`Facsimile: (617) 482-3003
`tom@hbsslaw.com
`kristenj@hbsslaw.com
`hannahs@hbsslaw.com
`erinb@hbsslaw.com
`bradleyv@hbsslaw.com
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff FWK Holdings,
`LLC and Lead Counsel for the
`Proposed Direct Purchaser Class
`
`Linda P. Nussbaum
`NUSSBAUM LAW GROUP, P.C.
`1211 Avenue of the Americas, 40th
`Floor
`New York, NY 10036-8718
`Telephone: (917) 438-9189
`lnussbaum@nussbaumpc.com
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff César Castillo, Inc.
`and the Proposed Direct Purchaser
`Class
`
`(Additional Counsel on Signature Page)
`
`ii
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 3 of 19
`
`Table of Contents
`
`INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................1
`FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ..............................................2
`ARGUMENT.............................................................................................................6
`a. The Parties are Well Positioned to Complete Briefing on an Expedited Basis6
`b. An Unnecessarily Lengthy Briefing Schedule Will Thwart the Benefits of
`Multidistrict Litigation and Unfairly Delay Other Multidistrict Litigation
`Parties Not Part of This Appeal ........................................................................7
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF ............................................................................................8
`CONCLUSION..........................................................................................................9
`
`iii
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 4 of 19
`
`Cases
`
`Table of Authorities
`
`Am. Pipe & Const. Co. v. Utah,
`414 U.S. 538, 547 (1974) .......................................................................................8
`Am. Sales Co., LLC v. Pfizer, Inc., 2017 WL 3669604 (E.D. Va. July 28, 2017),
`report and recommendation adopted, E.D. Va. No. 2:14CV361, 2017 WL
`3669097 (E.D. Va. Aug. 24, 2017).........................................................................6
`FWK Holdings, LLC v Merck & Co., Inc., et al.,
`C.A. No. 2:18cv00023............................................................................................4
`In re Lamictal Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litig.,
`957 F.3d 184 (3d Cir. 2020) ...................................................................................7
`In re Modafinil Antitrust Litig.,
`837 F.3d 238 (3d Cir. 2016) ...................................................................................7
`In re Suboxone (Buprenorphine Hydrochloride & Nalaxone) Antitrust Litig.,
`967 F.3d 264 (3d Cir. 2020) ...................................................................................6
`In re Zetia (Ezetimibe) Antitrust Litig.,
`325 F. Supp. 3d 1369, 1370 (U.S. Jud. Pan. Mult. Lit. 2018)................................4
`
`iv
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 5 of 19
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Pursuant to Fourth Circuit Local Rules 12(c) and 31(b), Appellees, the Direct
`
`Purchaser Class Plaintiffs1 hereby move this Court to set an expedited briefing
`
`schedule in this interlocutory appeal from the District Court’s Order approving
`
`certification of the direct purchaser class (Dist. Ct. Dkt. No. 1101), and respectfully
`
`request that the Court schedule oral argument during the next argument calendar
`
`week convenient to the Court after the final reply brief has been filed.
`
`There is good cause to expedite briefing and oral argument
`
`in this
`
`interlocutory appeal because:
`
`(1)
`
`the Defendants-Appellants2 and Plaintiffs-
`
`Appellees are amply prepared to proceed without delay, having already fully briefed
`
`the same issues to the Magistrate Judge, who provided an extensive Report and
`
`Recommendation, and the District Judge, who wrote a thorough Memorandum
`
`Order
`
`responding to Defendants-Appellants’ objections; and (2)
`
`the Direct
`
`Purchaser Class represents a portion of plaintiffs within a well-coordinated
`
`1 The Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs are a class of direct purchasers certified by
`the district court (Memorandum Order (Dkt. 1101)). They are represented by class
`representatives FWK Holdings, LLC; Rochester Drug Co-Operative, Inc.; and
`Cesar Castillo, Inc. The class as certified has thirty-five members.
`
`2 Defendants-Appellants are Merck & Co., Inc., Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.,
`Schering-Plough Corp., Schering Corp., and MSP Singapore Co. LLC (Merck) and
`Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. and Glenmark Generics Inc., USA (Glenmark).
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 6 of 19
`
`multidistrict litigation (“MDL”), and the appeal will likely delay rulings on pending
`
`substantive motions involving parties who are not a party to this appeal. Should an
`
`unwarranted delay cause the District Court to continue proceedings for other parties
`
`to the MDL, the judicial economy of MDL would be frustrated and judicial resources
`
`expended unnecessarily.
`
`Plaintiffs-Appellees request that the Court set the following accelerated
`
`briefing schedule: Defendants-Appellants file their opening brief no later than
`
`January 6, 2021; Plaintiffs-Appellees file their response brief by February 5, 2021;
`
`and Defendants-Appellants file their reply brief by February 22, 2021.
`
`Plaintiffs-Appellees requested that Defendants-Appellants agree to the above
`
`expedited schedule. Defendants-Appellants declined and indicated an intent to
`
`oppose this Motion.
`
`FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
`
`This is an appeal of issue that has already been briefed twice by the parties,
`
`who are therefore prepared to proceed expeditiously. Senior District Court Judge
`
`Smith’s order, Dkt. No. 1101, adopted Magistrate Judge Miller’s extensive and well-
`
`reasoned 93-page Report and Recommendation, Dkt. No. 967, each of which
`
`followed comprehensive briefing by the parties.
`
`The motion was initially brought before the court on the Direct Purchaser
`
`Class Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification and Memorandum in Support, Dkt.
`
`2
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 7 of 19
`
`Nos. 735 and 736, filed November 18, 2019. On January 20, 2020, Defendants,
`
`Merck and Glenmark, filed a joint opposition to the motion for class certification.
`
`Dkt. No. 819. On February 20, 2020, the Purchaser Class Plaintiffs filed a reply.
`
`Dkt. No. 871. On April 3, 2020, the Defendants filed a Supplemental Brief in
`
`Opposition to the Motion for Class Certification, Dkt. No. 904, to which the Direct
`
`Purchaser Class Plaintiffs filed a brief in response on April 17, 2020. Dkt. No. 910.
`
`The motion for class certification was referred to United States Magistrate Judge
`
`Douglas E. Miller, who held a hearing on May 1, 2020. Dkt. Nos. 888 and 927. On
`
`June 18, 2020, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Report and Recommendation
`
`(R&R), recommending that the court certify a class of thirty-five direct purchasers.
`
`Dkt. 967.
`
`The Defendants, Merck and Glenmark, filed a joint objection to the R&R on
`
`July 2, 2020. Dkt. No. 995. The Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs filed a brief in
`
`response to the Defendants’ objection on July 16, 2020. Dkt. No. 1002. On July 29,
`
`2020, the Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Filing of Supplemental
`
`Authority to inform the court of a recent ruling of the United States Bankruptcy
`
`Court for the Western District of New York in the bankruptcy proceeding for
`
`proposed class representative Rochester Drug Co-Operative, Inc. Dkt. No. 1017.
`
`On August 7, 2020, Merck filed a Response to the Notice. Dkt. No. 1028-2. Senior
`
`District Court Judge Smith issued a Memorandum Order on August 21, 2020,
`
`3
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 8 of 19
`
`adopting in part the R&R and certifying a class of thirty-five direct purchasers. Dkt.
`
`No. 1101.
`
`The Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs are but one group of plaintiffs in a highly
`
`coordinated MDL, consolidating claims of all purchasers of the brand drug Zetia
`
`who were overcharged because of Defendants’ conspiracy to delay generic
`
`competition. The first such suit was filed by a class representative on January 16,
`
`2018. FWK Holdings, LLC v Merck & Co., Inc., et al., C.A. No. 2:18cv00023. On
`
`June 8, 2018, the Judicial Panel for Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) consolidated
`
`all related claims, finding that coordination of the actions would “promote the just
`
`and efficient conduct of this litigation.” In re Zetia (Ezetimibe) Antitrust Litig., 325
`
`F. Supp. 3d 1369, 1370 (U.S. Jud. Pan. Mult. Lit. 2018). All plaintiffs jointly
`
`pursued discovery, which is now complete. There are also presently pending
`
`motions which may be case dispositive. Dkt. No. 1239. A briefing schedule has
`
`been set for Defendants’ upcoming motion to defer dispositive rulings due to this
`
`interlocutory appeal “even though the motions are ripe as to litigants which are not
`
`part of any class.” Id., at 2.
`
`Defendants’ upcoming motion to defer potentially dispositive rulings will
`
`affect multiple motions filed jointly by all MDL plaintiffs or against all MDL
`
`plaintiffs: Purchasers’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Concerning the
`
`Relevant Market, Dkt. No. 1077, filed on behalf of all MDL plaintiffs; Glenmark
`
`4
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 9 of 19
`
`Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on All Claims, Dkt. No. 1037, filed
`
`against all MDL plaintiffs; Merck Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, Dkt.
`
`No. 1067, filed against all MDL plaintiffs; Defendants’ Joint Motion to Exclude
`
`Proposed Expert Testimony of Attorney Shashank Upadhye, Dkt. No. 1031, filed
`
`against all MDL plaintiffs; Defendants’ Joint Motion to Exclude in Part Testimony
`
`and Opinions of Plaintiffs’ Expert Luis A. Molina, Dkt. No. 1034, filed against all
`
`MDL plaintiffs; Purchasers’ Motion to Exclude Portions of the Proposed Testimony
`
`of Dr. Mark Robbins, Dkt. No. 1055, filed on behalf of all MDL plaintiffs; and
`
`Purchasers’ Motion to Exclude the Proposed Testimony of Dr. Anupam Jena, Dkt.
`
`No. 1066, filed on behalf of all MDL plaintiffs. Parties to these motions, who are
`
`not part of the Direct Purchaser Class, include the members of the proposed class of
`
`End Payor Purchasers and the Retailer Plaintiffs, who are Walgreen Co., The Kroger
`
`Co., Albertsons Companies, Inc., HEB Grocery Company, L.P., CVS Pharmacy,
`
`Inc., Rite Aid Corporation, and Rite Aid Hdqtrs. Corporation.
`
`At a status conference of November 5, 2020, the District Court announced
`
`that the February 23, 2021 trial date, which had been set for all MDL Plaintiffs,
`
`would be removed from the docket due to COVID-19 and a backlog of criminal jury
`
`trials. Dkt. No. 1240, at 6. The Court remarked that it was not extending the trial
`
`date “indefinitely” and that the Court would “try and get cases ready for trial, try
`
`them as quickly as we can get to them”. Id., at 7. The schedule proposed herein is
`
`5
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 10 of 19
`
`intended to allow a return to the adjudication of potentially dispositive motions, so
`
`that trial may be rescheduled without unnecessary delay, as intended by the District
`
`Court.
`
`ARGUMENT
`
`a. The Parties Are Well Positioned to Complete Briefing on an
`Expedited Basis
`
`The issues presented by this appeal have been thoroughly and repeatedly
`
`briefed by the parties, and the Defendants-Appellants’ positions were addressed by
`
`the Magistrate Judge in the R&R and the District Judge in the Memorandum
`
`Opinion. There is no new issue for which the parties need significant time for legal
`
`research and drafting. The parties are familiar with a mature body of case law
`
`approving class certification of similar classes.
`
`See, e.g., In re Suboxone
`
`(Buprenorphine Hydrochloride & Nalaxone) Antitrust Litig., 967 F.3d 264 (3d Cir.
`
`2020); Am. Sales Co., LLC v. Pfizer, Inc., 2017 WL 3669604 (E.D. Va. July 28,
`
`2017), report and recommendation adopted, E.D. Va. No. 2:14CV361, 2017 WL
`
`3669097 (E.D. Va. Aug. 24, 2017).
`
`The Defendants-Appellants’ Petition For Permission To Appeal Under Rule
`
`23(f) From Order Granting Class Certification (“Petition”) identifies the three
`
`arguments they will make, but those arguments have already been briefed repeatedly
`
`by the parties. The Defendants-Appellants will base their argument regarding
`
`6
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 11 of 19
`
`numerosity upon the Third Circuit’s decision, In re Modafinil Antitrust Litig., 837
`
`F.3d 238 (3d Cir. 2016), Petition at 12; but the District Judge pointed out that the
`
`Defendants-Appellants have already relied “particularly” upon Modafinil on the
`
`same point.
`
`(Dkt. No. 1101, at 5). The Defendants-Appellants will make an
`
`objection to the class representatives, Petition at 16; but both the R&R, Dkt. 967, at
`
`47-60, and the District Judge’s Memorandum Order, Dkt. 1101 at 11-15, provide a
`
`complete analysis of these arguments. The Defendants-Appellants will make an
`
`argument based upon another Third Circuit decision, In re Lamictal Direct
`
`Purchaser Antitrust Litig., 957 F.3d 184 (3d Cir. 2020). Petition at 21 and 22.
`
`However, as noted by the District Court, that case was at the “center” of the
`
`Defendants-Appellants’ arguments regarding whether the class members suffered an
`
`anti-trust injury. Id., at 15. There is simply no reason for delay.
`
`b. An Unnecessarily Lengthy Briefing Schedule Will Thwart the
`Benefits of Multidistrict Litigation and Unfairly Delay Other
`Multidistrict Litigation Parties Not Part of This Appeal
`
`Not only is a lengthy briefing schedule unnecessary for the parties to this
`
`appeal, it would unfairly delay all plaintiffs in the MDL, including the class of End-
`
`Payor Purchasers and “litigants which are not part of any class.” (Dkt. No. 1239, at
`
`2). The Defendants-Appellants have argued to the District Court that rulings on
`
`potentially dispositive motions, already briefed to the court, will have to be delayed
`
`until resolution of this interlocutory appeal due to the potential for one-way
`
`7
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 12 of 19
`
`intervention issues. (Id., at 1-2). One-way intervention is the concern that members
`
`of a class potentially “benefit from a favorable judgment without subjecting
`
`themselves to the binding effect of an unfavorable one.” Am. Pipe & Const. Co. v.
`
`Utah, 414 U.S. 538, 547 (1974). The one-way intervention issues that arise out of
`
`this appeal potentially affect only the Plaintiffs-Appellees’ class, but the pending
`
`motions being put on hold affect all parties to the MDL.
`
`The hold placed on potentially dispositive motions affects three summary
`
`judgment motions and four Daubert motions, each of which include litigants who
`
`are not part of the Plaintiffs-Appellees’ class. These motions are fully briefed. The
`
`District Court is holding its rulings until completion of briefing on the issue of one-
`
`way intervention, which is scheduled to be completed by January 25, 2021. The
`
`Plaintiffs-Appellees seek a briefing schedule here that will not delay these motions
`
`unnecessarily beyond that date.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`The Plaintiff-Appellees propose the following schedule:
`
`On Wednesday, January 6, 2021: the Defendants-Appellants file their
`
`opening merits brief;
`
`On Friday, February 5, 2021:
`
`the Plaintiffs-Appellees file their
`
`response merits brief;
`
`8
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 13 of 19
`
`On Monday, February 22, 2021: the Defendants-Appellants file their
`
`reply merits brief;
`
`At the earliest possible opportunity after briefing is complete, the Court is
`
`asked to schedule oral argument.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`For the foregoing reasons, this Court should issue an expedited schedule for
`
`briefs.
`
`Dated: November 11, 2020
`
`/s/ William H. Monroe, Jr.
`William H. Monroe, Jr. (VSB No.
`27441)
`Marc C. Greco (VSB No. 41496)
`Kip A. Harbison (VSB No. 38648)
`Michael A. Glasser (VSB No. 17651)
`GLASSER AND GLASSER, P.L.C.
`Crown Center, Suite 600
`580 East Main Street
`Norfolk, VA 23510
`Telephone: (757) 625-6787
`Facsimile: (757) 625-5959
`bill@glasserlaw.com
`marcg@glasserlaw.com
`kip@glasserlaw.com
`michael@glasserlaw.com
`
`Local Counsel for Direct Purchaser
`Plaintiffs FWK Holdings, LLC,
`Rochester Drug Cooperative, Inc.,
`Cesar Castillo, Inc. and the Proposed
`Direct Purchaser Class
`
`9
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 14 of 19
`
`Thomas M. Sobol
`Kristen A. Johnson
`Hannah Schwarzschild
`Erin C. Burns
`Bradley Vettraino
`HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
`55 Cambridge Parkway, Suite 301
`Cambridge, MA 02142
`Telephone: (617) 482-3700
`Facsimile: (617) 482-3003
`tom@hbsslaw.com
`kristenj@hbsslaw.com
`hannahs@hbsslaw.com
`erinb@hbsslaw.com
`bradleyv@hbsslaw.com
`
`Lead Counsel for the Proposed Direct
`Purchaser Class
`
`Sharon K Robertson
`Donna M. Evans
`COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL
`PLLC
`88 Pine Street, 14th Floor
`New York, NY 10005
`Tel: (212) 838-7797
`Fax: (212) 838-7745
`srobertson@cohenmilstein.com
`devans@cohenmilstein.com
`
`Steve D. Shadowen
`Matthew C. Weiner
`HILLIARD & SHADOWEN LLP
`1135 W. 6th Street, Suite 125
`Austin, TX 78703
`Tel.: (855) 344-3298
`steve@hilliardshadowenlaw.com
`matt@hilliardshadowenlaw.com
`
`10
`
`John D. Radice
`RADICE LAW FIRM, P.C.
`475 Wall Street
`Princeton, NJ 08540
`Tel.: (646) 245-8502
`Fax: (609) 385-0745
`jradice@radicelawfirm.com
`
`Paul E. Slater
`Joseph M. Vanek
`David P. Germaine
`Alberto Rodriguez
`SPERLING & SLATER, P.C.
`55 W. Monroe, Suite 3200
`Chicago, IL 60603
`Telephone: (312) 641-3200
`Facsimile: (312)641-6492
`pes@sperling-law.com
`jvanek@sperling-law.com
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 15 of 19
`
`dgermaine@sperling-law.com
`arodriguez@sperling-law.com
`
`Joseph H. Meltzer
`Terence S. Ziegler
`KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK
`LLP
`280 King of Prussia Road
`Radnor, PA 19087
`Telephone: (610) 667-7706
`Facsimile: (610) 667-7056
`jmeltzer@ktmc.com
`tziegler@ktmc.com
`
`Michael L. Roberts
`Karen Sharp Halbert
`Debra G. Josephson
`Stephanie Smith
`William R. Olson
`Sarah E. DeLoach
`ROBERTS LAW FIRM, P.A.
`20 Rahling Circle
`Little Rock, AR 72223
`Telephone: (501) 821-5575
`Facsimile: (501) 821-4474
`mikeroberts@robertslawfirm.us
`karenhalbert@robertslawfirm.us
`debrajosephson@robertslawfirm.us
`stephaniesmith@robertslawfirm.us
`williamolson@robertslawfirm.us
`sarahdeloach@robertslawfirm.us
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff FWK Holdings, LLC and the Proposed Direct Purchaser
`Class
`
`Linda P. Nussbaum
`NUSSBAUM LAW GROUP, P.C.
`1211 Avenue of the Americas, 40th
`Floor
`New York, NY 10036-8718
`Telephone: (917) 438-9189
`lnussbaum@nussbaumpc.com
`
`Jayne A. Goldstein
`SHEPHERD, FINKELMAN, MILLER
`& SHAH, LLP
`1625 North Commerce Parkway, Ste.
`320
`Fort Lauderdale, FL 33326
`Telephone: (954) 515-0123
`Facsimile: (866) 300-7367
`
`11
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 16 of 19
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff Cesar Castillo, Inc. and the Proposed Direct Purchaser Class
`
`jgoldstein@sfmslaw.com
`
`David F. Sorensen
`Ellen T. Noteware
`Nicholas Urban
`BERGER MONTAGUE PC
`1818 Market Street, Suite 3600
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`Telephone: (215) 875-3000
`Facsimile: (215) 875-4604
`dsorensen@bm.net
`enoteware@bm.net
`nurban@bm.net
`
`Peter R. Kohn
`Joseph T. Lukens
`FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
`One Penn Center, Suite 1550
`1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard,
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`Telephone: (215) 277-5770
`Facsimile: (215) 277-5771
`pkohn@faruqilaw.com
`jlukens@faruqilaw.com
`
`Barry Taus
`Archana Tamoshunas
`Kevin Landau
`TAUS, CEBULASH & LANDAU, LLP
`80 Maiden Lane, Suite 1204
`New York, NY10038
`Telephone: (646) 873-7654
`btaus@tcllaw.com
`atamoshunas@tcllaw.com
`klandau@tcllaw.com
`
`Bradley J. Demuth
`FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
`685 Third Avenue, 26th Floor
`New York, NY 10017
`Telephone: (212) 983-9330
`Facsimile: (212) 983-9331
`bdemuth@faruqilaw.com
`
`Counsel for Rochester Drug Co-operative, Inc. and the Proposed Direct Purchaser
`Class
`
`12
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 17 of 19
`
`CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
`
`This petition complies with the word limit of Rule 5(c)(1) of the Federal
`
`Rules of Appellate Procedure, as it contains 1851 words, excluding the portions
`
`exempted by Rules 5(b)(1)(E) and 32(f).
`
`The Petition complies with the typeface requirements of Rule 32(a)(5)(A)
`
`and the type-style requirements of Rule 32(a)(6) because it has been prepared in a
`
`proportionally spaced typeface using Microsoft Word in 14-point, Times New
`
`Roman font.
`
`/s/ William H. Monroe, Jr._
`William H. Monroe, Jr.
`(VSB No. 27441)
`GLASSER AND GLASSER, P.L.C.
`Crown Center, Suite 600
`580 East Main Street
`Norfolk, VA 23510
`Telephone: (757) 625-6787
`Facsimile: (757) 625-5959
`bill@glasserlaw.com
`Local Counsel for Direct Purchaser
`Plaintiffs - Appellees FWK Holdings,
`LLC, Rochester Drug Cooperative,
`Inc., Cesar Castillo, Inc. and the
`Proposed Direct Purchaser Class
`
`13
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 18 of 19
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`I hereby certify that on November 11, 2020, I electronically filed the Motion
`
`to Expedite with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals for
`
`the Fourth Circuit using the appellate CM/ECF system, which will send a
`
`notification of such filing to all counsel of record who have made a formal
`
`appearance. I further certify that on the same day I served the foregoing by email
`
`on the following:
`
`Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr.
`Samuel G. Liversidge
`Christopher D. Dusseault
`GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER
`LLP
`333 South Grand Avenue
`Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197
`Telephone: (213) 229-7855
`Facsimile: (213) 229-6855
`Tboutrous@gibsondunn.com
`Sliversidge@gibsondunn.com
`CDusseault@gibsondunn.com
`
`Veronica S. Lewis
`Ashley Johnson
`GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER
`LLP
`2001 Ross Avenue
`Dallas, TX 75201-6912
`Telephone: (214) 698-3320
`Facsimile: (214) 571-2936
`vlewis@gibsondunn.com
`ajohnson@gibsondunn.com
`
`Eric J. Stock
`GIBSON DUNN & CRUTCHER
`LLP
`200 Park Avenue
`New York, NY 10166
`Telephone: (212) 351-2301
`Facsimile: (212) 716-0801
`estock@gibsondunn.com
`
`Stephen A. Noona
`KAUFMAN & CANOLES, P.C.
`150 W. Main Street, Suite 2100
`Norfolk, VA 23510-1665
`Telephone: (757) 624-3239
`Facsimile: (757) 888) 360-9092
`senoona@kaufcan.com
`
`Richard H. Ottinger
`VANDEVENTER BLACK LLP
`101 West Main Street, Suite 500
`Norfolk, VA 23510
`Telephone: (757)446-8600
`Facsimile: (757) 446-8670
`rottinger@vanblacklaw.com
`
`14
`
`
`
`USCA4 Appeal: 20-2184 Doc: 6 Filed: 11/11/2020 Pg: 19 of 19
`
`Steven A. Reed
`MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS
`LLP
`1701 Market Street
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`Telephone: (215) 963-5000
`Facsimile: (215) 963-5001
`steven.reed@morganlewis.com
`
`Dated: November 11, 2020
`
`/s/ William H. Monroe, Jr.
`William H. Monroe, Jr. (VSB No. 27441)
`
`15
`
`