Amgen 2011 Annual Report Download - page 175

AMGEN INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
the opportunity to join in the proposed settlement or, if they object, to have the settlement evaluated in a federal
court fairness hearing to determine whether it is fair, adequate and reasonable under all the circumstances. The
proposed settlement remains subject to continuing discussions regarding the components of the agreement and
the completion and execution of all required documentation, and until the proposed settlement becomes final,
there can be no guarantee that these matters will be resolved by the agreement in principle.
In addition, on September 19, 2011, Amgen filed a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court in the
U.S. ex rel. Westmoreland v. Amgen, et al. matter. The petition sought leave to appeal the First Circuit Court’s
reinstatement of the claims of the states of California, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, New Mexico and New
York, which had been dismissed by the Massachusetts District Court. However, as described above, Amgen
expects that these state claims will be resolved if the ongoing settlement discussions are successfully concluded.
Accordingly, on December 12, 2011, Amgen withdrew its petition for certiorari and the U.S. Supreme Court
subsequently dismissed the petition on December 29, 2011.
As part of the settlement discussions described above, Amgen was made aware that it is a defendant in
several other civil qui tam actions. These other qui tam actions are in addition to the Qui Tam Actions described
above. One of these other qui tam actions, U.S. ex rel. May v. Amgen, et al. was filed by Samuel May on June 6,
2010, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, and was unsealed in connection with it
being dismissed by the Court on January 5, 2012 for failure to prosecute the matter. The remaining other qui tam
actions remain under seal in the U.S. federal courts in which they were filed. Included with these other actions
(including the May action) are allegations that Amgen’s promotional, contracting, sales and marketing activities
relating to Enbrel®and Aranesp®caused the submission of various false claims under the Federal Civil False
Claims Act and various State False Claims Acts. Certain of the allegations in these remaining other actions are
not encompassed in the proposed settlement described above, and Amgen intends to cooperate fully with the
government in its investigation of these new allegations. Amgen continues to explore with the government
whether these remaining matters will be resolved in connection with the proposed settlement discussed above.
U.S. ex rel. Streck v. Allergan, et al.
A complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against Amgen and
numerous other pharmaceutical manufacturers, pursuant to the Qui Tam provisions of the Federal Civil False
Claims Act and on behalf of 24 named states and the District of Columbia under their respective State False
Claims Acts, was unsealed and became public on or about June 6, 2011. The plaintiff, Ronald Streck, alleges that
from 2004 to the present, defendants failed to report accurate pricing data to Medicare and Medicaid, including
data used to calculate average sales price and average manufacturer’s price, thereby causing the federal and state
governments to reimburse defendants at inflated rates and causing the manufacturers to underpay Medicaid
rebates. This matter, in which the federal government has declined to intervene, is not affected by the proposed
settlement described above. On September 7, 2011, plaintiff filed a fourth amended complaint and on
December 9, 2011, defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint.
F-51