In the United States District Court for the District of Colorado
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Case 1:19-cv-02884 Document 2 Filed 10/09/19 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 186 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action 1:19-cv-02884 CITY OF GREELEY, Plaintiff, v. RICHARD S. SACKLER, JONATHAN D. SACKLER, MORTIMER D.A. SACKLER, KATHE A. SACKLER, ILENE SACKLER LEFCOURT, BEVERLY SACKLER, THERESA SACKLER, DAVID A. SACKLER, TRUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF MEMBERS OF THE RAYMOND SACKLER FAMILY, RHODES PHARMACEUTICALS L.P., RHODES TECHNOLOGIES INC., RHODES PHARMACEUTICALS INC., RHODES TECHNOLOGIES, ENDO HEALTH SOLUTIONS INC., ENDO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., JOHNSON & JOHNSON, TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES, LTD., TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC., CEPHALON, INC., ALLERGAN PLC f/k/a ACTAVIS PLC, ALLERGAN FINANCE, LLC f/k/a ACTAVIS, INC. f/k/a WATSON PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., WATSON LABORATORIES, INC., ACTAVIS LLC, ACTAVIS PHARMA, INC. f/k/a WATSON PHARMA, INC, MALLINCKRODT PLC, MALLINCKRODT, LLC, SPECGX LLC, PAR PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES, INC., PAR PHARMACEUTICAL, INC., MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS, LLC, AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., IMPAX GENERICS, IMPAX LABORATORIES, INC., KVK-TECH, INC., Case 1:19-cv-02884 Document 2 Filed 10/09/19 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 186 SANDOZ, INC., CARDINAL HEALTH, INC., MCKESSON CORPORATION, AMERISOURCEBERGEN DRUG CORPORATION, WALGREENS BOOTS ALLIANCE INC. a/k/a WALGREEN CO, WALMART, INC., SMITH’S FOOD & DRUG CENTERS, INC. d/b/a PEYTON’S PHOENIX, and JOHN AND JANE DOES 1 THROUGH 100, INCLUSIVE, Defendants. COMPLAINT Case 1:19-cv-02884 Document 2 Filed 10/09/19 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 186 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1 II. PARTIES ............................................................................................................ 8 III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE........................................................................... 26 IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS ............................................................................... 26 A. History and Background of Medical Use of Opioids ............................... 26 B. The Sackler Family Played a Pivotal Role in Setting the Stage for the Worst Man-Made Epidemic in Modern Medical History.................................................................................................... 32 1. The Sackler family pioneered the integration of advertising and medicine. ........................................................... 32 2. The Sacklers were personally involved in the development and aggressive marketing of OxyContin. ............... 36 3. Following reports of OxyContin abuse and federal investigations, the Sacklers continued to promote opioids but took steps to shield their assets from judgment. .................................................................................... 41 4. In response to enforcement actions in the United States, the Sacklers have moved their aggressive opioid marketing—and their wealth—overseas. .......................... 45 C. The Booming Business of Addiction ...................................................... 50 1. Other Manufacturing Defendants leapt at the opioid opportunity. ................................................................................. 50 2. Distributor Defendants knowingly supplied dangerous quantities of opioids while advocating for limited oversight and enforcement. ......................................................... 56 3. Pill mills and overprescribing doctors also placed their financial interests ahead of their patients’ interests. .................... 60 4. Widespread prescription opioid use broadened the market for heroin and fentanyl..................................................... 64 -i- Case 1:19-cv-02884 Document 2 Filed 10/09/19 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 186 D. The Marketing Defendants Promoted Prescription Opioids Through Several Channels. ................................................................... 68 1. The Marketing Defendants aggressively deployed sales representatives to push their products. .............................. 69 2. The Marketing Defendants bankrolled seemingly independent “front groups” to promote opioid use and fight restrictions on opioids. ......................................................... 75 3. “It was pseudoscience”: the Marketing Defendants paid prominent physicians to promote their products. ................. 81 4. The Marketing Defendants used “unbranded” advertising as a platform for their misrepresentations about opioids. .............................................................................. 89 E. Specific Misrepresentations Made by the Marketing Defendants. ........................................................................................... 90 1. The Marketing Defendants falsely claimed that the risk of opioid abuse and addiction was low. ................................ 90 2. The Marketing Defendants falsely claimed that opioids were proven effective for chronic pain and would improve quality of life. ..................................................... 106 3. The Marketing Defendants falsely claimed doctors and patients could increase opioid usage indefinitely without added risk. .................................................................... 110 4. The Marketing Defendants falsely instructed doctors and patients that more opioids were the solution when patients presented symptoms of addiction. ............................... 116 5. The Marketing Defendants falsely claimed that risk- mitigation strategies, including tapering and abuse- deterrent technologies, made it safe to prescribe opioids for chronic use. ............................................................. 121 F. Research Demonstrates that the Manufacturing Defendants’ Claims Are False.................................................................................. 128 -ii- Case 1:19-cv-02884 Document 2 Filed 10/09/19 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 186 G. The 2016 CDC Guideline and Other Recent Analyses Confirm That the Marketing Defendants’ Statements About the Risks and Benefits of Opioids Are Patently False. ......................... 130 H. Greeley Has Been Directly Affected by the Opioid Epidemic Caused by Defendants. ....................................................................... 138 I. No Federal Agency Action, Including by the FDA, Can Provide the Relief Greeley Seeks Here. .............................................. 143 V. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF .................................................................................... 144 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF – PUBLIC NUISANCE ....................................... 144 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF – VIOLATIONS OF THE COLORADO CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, C.R.S. § 6- 1, ET SEQ. ........................................................................................... 146 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF – NEGLIGENCE ............................................... 148 FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF – GROSS NEGLIGENCE ............................. 150 FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF – UNJUST ENRICHMENT ................................ 152 SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF – VIOLATIONS OF THE RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS ACT (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961, ET SEQ................................................... 153 A. Description of the Defendants’ Enterprises .......................................... 154 B. The Enterprises Sought to Fraudulently Increase Defendants’ Profits and Revenues ...................................................... 158 C. Predicate Acts: Mail and Wire Fraud.................................................... 163 D. Greeley Has Been Damaged by Defendants’ RICO Violations ............................................................................................. 174 SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF – FRAUD AND DECEIT .............................. 176 EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF – CIVIL CONSPIRACY .................................. 178 PRAYER FOR RELIEF ............................................................................................. 179 JURY TRIAL DEMAND ............................................................................................. 181 -iii- Case 1:19-cv-02884 Document 2 Filed 10/09/19 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 186 I. INTRODUCTION 1. The United States is experiencing the worst man-made epidemic in modern medical history—the misuse, abuse, and over-prescription of opioids. 2. Since 2000, more than 400,000 Americans have lost their lives to an opioid overdose, more than five times as many American lives as were lost in the entire Vietnam War. On any given day, 134 people will die from opioid overdoses in the United States. Drug overdoses are now the leading cause of death for Americans under age fifty. The recent increases in drug overdose deaths have been so steep that they have contributed to reductions in the country’s life expectancy over the last three years, a pattern unprecedented since World War II. 3. The opioid crisis has become a public health emergency. Plaintiff City of Greeley, located in northern Colorado and home to over 100,000 residents, has been deeply affected by the crisis. The opioid abuse prevalent throughout the City has affected Plaintiff in numerous ways, not only through the need for increased emergency medical services, but also through increased drug-related offenses affecting law enforcement and the municipal court, and through additional resources spent on community and social programs, including for the next generation of Greeley residents, who are growing