Actavis is trying to rid itself of some nasty legal entanglements that it picked up in its $8.5 billion deal for Ireland's Warner Chilcott, meeting with the Justice Department looking for a way to put to rest an investigation into allegations Warner Chilcott essentially bribed doctors into prescribing some of its meds.
Puerto Rico's drug production sector has had an eventful few years, with investments by Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb and others being offset by cutbacks at Merck and Pfizer. Now the island can add another line to its list of positive events: Actavis is investing $48 million to revitalize assets it acquired in the takeover of Warner Chilcott.
Actavis began tallying up just how many bodies it needed in its U.S. sales organization as soon as it closed Oct. 1 on its $8.5 billion merger with Warner Chilcott.
The Federal Trade Commission is taking a closer look at what the $8.5 billion buyout of Warner Chilcott by Actavis will mean for consumers.
As the dust settles around Actavis' announced buyout of Warner Chilcott, it's time to dig into some of the nitty-gritty details about "New Actavis." For instance, which of Warner's top people will stick around--and if they don't, how much severance might they collect on the way out? And just how big is the tax cut Actavis expects from making the deal?
Actavis and Warner Chilcott have struck a deal. And it's bigger than the $5 billion-or-so that was bandied about while the companies negotiated. About $3 billion bigger, in fact: According to Actavis, the company will acquire Warner in a stock swap worth $8.5 billion.
We thought Actavis had a love triangle going with potential merger partners Warner Chilcott and Valeant Pharmaceuticals, as an analyst dubbed it earlier this week. Now, news emerges that it's more like a love quadrangle, with rejections on two sides.
While Valeant Pharmaceuticals was chatting up Actavis about a potential merger-of-equals, Actavis was apparently mulling a bid for Warner Chilcott, the Irish drugmaker that specializes in women's health and dermatology.
A union fund is suing Warner Chilcott, Watson Laboratories and Lupin, claiming that their Loestrin 24 Fe patent settlements amounted to unfair market-sharing deals that cost payers money. Warner's key patent on the formula was weak, the fund claims, and the generics makers only backed away because Warner paid them to.
Two former Warner Chilcott reps have blown the whistle. In a False Claims Act lawsuit unsealed last week, the ex-salespeople detail a long series of allegations, including kickbacks, privacy violations and off-label shenanigans.