Dermatology Expert Opines On Antitrust Class Action Lawsuit

ByWendy Ketner, M.D.

|

Updated onSeptember 4, 2019

Court: United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Jurisdiction
: Federal
Case Name
: In re Solodyn (Minocycline Hydrochloride) Antitrust Litig.
Citation
: 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11921

Facts

This was class action suit wherein direct purchaser plaintiffs alleged that the defendants, Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation and Impax Laboratories, Inc., violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, and end-payor plaintiffs alleged that the defendants have violated various state laws. The remaining claim of retailer plaintiffs was that the defendants’ actions violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2.

The parties filed motions to exclude the testimony of each other’s experts. A Daubert motion was moved for the plaintiffs’ dermatology expert.

The Dermatology Expert

The plaintiffs’ dermatology expert was an associate professor of dermatology at the Boston University School of Medicine. She was also the founder and director of the Center for Ethnic Skin as well as the director of the Cosmetic and Laser Center.

The defendants moved to exclude portions of the testimony of the plaintiffs’ dermatology expert. The defendants contended that the expert misunderstood the term “interchangeable” to mean “pharmacological equivalence” rather than “functional interchangeability,” making her testimony unreliable and irrelevant. The defendants also argued that the testimony of the plaintiffs’ dermatology expert completely contradicted her own medical practices on interchangeability.

The defendants further sought to exclude the expert’s opinion with regard to the clinical value of Solodyn Add-On Strengths.

Held

The court denied defendant’s motion to exclude portions of testimony of the plaintiffs’ expert.

The court observed that the definition of interchangeability by the defendant might differ from the expert’s definition. However, it would be relevant for the jury based on her experience and documents and medical literature relied upon. The court rejected the defendants’ contentions against the expert’s opinion regarding the clinical value of Solodyn Add-On Strengths, asserting that they went to the weight of her opinion.

It was determined that the court must ensure that a dermatological expert’s testimony both rests on a reliable foundation and is relevant to the task at hand.

About the author

Wendy Ketner, M.D.

Wendy Ketner, M.D.

Dr. Wendy Ketner is a distinguished medical professional with a comprehensive background in surgery and medical research. Currently serving as the Senior Vice President of Medical Affairs at the Expert Institute, she plays a pivotal role in overseeing the organization's most important client relationships. Dr. Ketner's extensive surgical training was completed at Mount Sinai Beth Israel, where she gained hands-on experience in various general surgery procedures, including hernia repairs, cholecystectomies, appendectomies, mastectomies for breast cancer, breast reconstruction, surgical oncology, vascular surgery, and colorectal surgery. She also provided care in the surgical intensive care unit.

Her research interests have focused on post-mastectomy reconstruction and the surgical treatment of gastric cancer, including co-authoring a textbook chapter on the subject. Additionally, she has contributed to research on the percutaneous delivery of stem cells following myocardial infarction.

Dr. Ketner's educational background includes a Bachelor's degree from Yale University in Latin American Studies and a Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) from SUNY Downstate College of Medicine. Moreover, she is a member of the Board of Advisors for Opollo Technologies, a fintech healthcare AI company, contributing her medical expertise to enhance healthcare technology solutions. Her role at Expert Institute involves leveraging her medical knowledge to provide insights into legal cases, underscoring her unique blend of medical and legal acumen.

Find an expert witness near you

What State is your case in?

What party are you representing?