# Lipitor Antitrust Litigation v.

> Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · September 8, 2026

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11436822

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
- **Decided:** September 8, 2026
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11436822

## Opinion text

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

Nos. 24-2184, 24-2185, 24-2189, 24-2194, 24-2202, 24-2203, 24-2256 & 24-2257

In re: Lipitor Antitrust Litigation

(D.N.J. No. 3:12-cv-02389)
(MDL No. 2332)

SUR PETITION FOR REHEARING

Present: HARDIMAN, SHWARTZ, RESTREPO, BIBAS, PORTER, MATEY, PHIPPS,
FREEMAN, MONTGOMERY-REEVES, CHUNG, BOVE, MASCOTT and SCIRICA*,
Circuit Judges

The petition for rehearing filed by Appellants Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs in

the above-entitled case (Nos. 24-2202 & 24-2203) having been submitted to the judges

who participated in the decision of this Court, it is hereby ORDERED that the petition for

rehearing by the panel is GRANTED. The Clerk is directed to file the amended opinion

*
The Honorable Anthony J. Scirica, a member of the merits panel for this appeal,
was unavailable to participate in the decision on panel rehearing. The request for panel
rehearing has been submitted to the remaining members of the merits panel, and the
request for en banc rehearing has been submitted to all active members of the Court who
are not recused. See 28 U.S.C. § 46(d); 3d Cir. I.O.P. 12.1.
contemporaneously with this order. As the revisions do not affect the disposition of the

appeal, the judgment will remain as filed.

The petition for rehearing in the above-entitled case (Nos. 24-2202 & 24-2203)

having also been submitted to all the available circuit judges of the circuit in regular

active service, and a majority of the judges of the circuit in regular service not having

voted for rehearing, the petition for rehearing before the Court en banc filed by

Appellants Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs is DENIED.

The petition for rehearing filed by Appellants CVS Pharmacy, Inc., et al.,

Walgreen Co., et al., Meijer, Inc., et al., and Giant Eagle, Inc., in the above-entitled case

(Nos. 24-2184, 24-2185, 24-2189, 24-2194, 24-2256 & 24-2257) having been submitted

to the judges who participated in the decision of this Court and to all the other available

circuit judges of the circuit in regular active service, and no judge who concurred in the

decision having asked for rehearing, and a majority of the judges of the circuit in regular

service not having voted for rehearing, the petition for rehearing filed by those Appellants

is DENIED.

BY THE COURT,

s/Patty Shwartz
Circuit Judge

Date: September 8, 2026
Amr/cc: all counsel of record

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11436822. Public record. Not legal advice.