AT&T Accuses Generic Drugmakers of Price-Fixing in New Lawsuit

Generic drugmakers are colluding to raise prices on their products for employer-sponsored health plans, AT&T alleged in a 725-page complaint filed Tuesday.

AT&T Services Inc. accused dozens of drugmakers of illegally allocating customers and rigging bids for over 200 generic drugs since 2009 in a lawsuit filed in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The company is seeking to recoup costs for its employee benefit plan.

The case is the latest example of employers fighting rising health0care costs in court, following the increased fiduciary responsibilities Congress placed on them in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021. Workers have also been targeting employers over drug costs through their contracts with pharmacy benefit managers, which operate the drug benefit for health insurers.

The drugmakers divided customers among themselves and forged an illegal agreement to raise prices in tandem with one another in a “fair share” conspiracy, AT&T alleged. Multiple drugmakers targeted in the lawsuit previously admitted to splitting market share in a series of settlements with the Department of Justice, and are also facing a multidistrict class action.

AT&T pointed to steep increases in prices for generic drugs as evidence of the alleged scheme, as well as internal industry emails allegedly discussing price-fixing strategies. A 500-pill bottle of antibiotic doxycycline rose from an average price of $20 in October 2013 to $1,849 in April 2014, the company said. A 100-tablet bottle of asthma drug albuterol sulfate increased from $11 to $434.

“There are no market forces that explain the Defendants’ pricing activities other than anticompetitive collusion,” the company wrote.

Several drugmakers contacted by Bloomberg Law did not immediately return requests for comment.

AT&T is represented by Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott LLP.

The case is AT&T Services, Inc. v. Actavis Holdco U.S., Inc., E.D. Pa., No. 2:25-cv-06772, complaint filed 12/2/25.