In LifeWatch Services Inc. v. Highmark Inc., the Third Circuit determined that a medical device company had plausibly alleged a conspiracy among Blue Cross Blue Shield health insurance companies to deny their insured coverage for telemetry monitors.  The decision reversed a district court ruling that the plaintiff had failed to allege anticompetitive effects sufficiently to show that the challenged restraint was unreasonable. Specifically, the Third Circuit held that the plaintiff had plausibly alleged an agreement by the Blues to refuse to deal with the plaintiff in a relevant product market. It further held that the complaint properly alleged that the restraint had anticompetitive effects harming consumers by, among other things, reducing output, choice, and quality. Background
The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit finds that a medical device company conspired to deny insurance coverage for telemetry monitors (LifeWatch Services / Highmark)
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.