The US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan explains its denial of motion to dismiss in Most Favored Nation -MFN- clauses decision in the health care industry (Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan)

Federal/State Antitrust Suit Against Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Can Proceed* Last week, the federal district court in Detroit denied Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan’s motion to dismiss a federal/state antitrust action challenging the health insurer’s use of most favored nation (MFN) clauses in its provider agreements with various hospitals. The suit, filed in October 2010, alleges that the MFN clauses unreasonably restrained trade in violation of Sec.1 of the Sherman Act and Sec. 2 of the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act. (See blog post of October 19, 2010.) In its motion to dismiss, Blue Cross argued that the complaint failed to plausibly allege relevant markets, market power, anticompetitive effects arising from the use of MFNs in any relevant market, and facts supporting a

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

  • Wolters Kluwer (Riverwoods)

Quotation

Jeffrey May, The US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan explains its denial of motion to dismiss in Most Favored Nation -MFN- clauses decision in the health care industry (Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan), 12 August 2011, e-Competitions Bulletin August 2011, Art. N° 38395

Visites 752

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues