Pfizer 2010 Annual Report Download - page 108

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Pfizer Inc. and Subsidiary Companies
A number of individual lawsuits have been filed against us in various U.S. federal and state courts and in certain other countries
alleging suicide, attempted suicide and other personal injuries as a result of the purported ingesting of Neurontin. Certain of the U.S.
federal actions have been transferred for consolidated pre-trial proceedings to the same Multi-District Litigation referred to in the first
paragraph of this section. In addition, in February 2010 in a proceeding pending in Ontario, Canada, the court certified a class
consisting of all persons in Canada, except in Quebec, who purchased and ingested Neurontin prior to August 2004. The plaintiffs
claim that Pfizer failed to provide adequate warning of the alleged risks of personal injury associated with Neurontin. The parties
have jointly sought court approval to include in this proceeding two purported province-wide class actions pending in Quebec that
include substantially similar allegations.
Lipitor
In 2004, a former employee filed a “whistleblower” action against us in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
The complaint remained under seal until September 2007, at which time the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York
declined to intervene in the case. We were served with the complaint in December 2007. Plaintiff alleges that, through patient and
medical education programs, written materials and other actions aimed at doctors, consumers, payers and investors, the Company
promoted Lipitor for use by certain patients contrary to national cholesterol guidelines that plaintiff claims are a part of the labeled
indications for the product. Plaintiff alleges violations of the Federal Civil False Claims Act and the false claims acts of certain states
and seeks treble damages and civil penalties on behalf of the federal government and the specified states as the result their
purchase, or reimbursement of patients for the purchase, of Lipitor allegedly for such off-label uses. Plaintiff also seeks
compensation as a whistleblower under those federal and state statutes. In addition, plaintiff alleges that he was wrongfully
terminated, in violation of the anti-retaliation provisions of the Federal Civil False Claims Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and
applicable New York law, for raising concerns about the alleged off-label promotion of Lipitor and about alleged instances of sexual
harassment in the workplace, and he seeks damages and the reinstatement of his employment. In 2009, the court dismissed without
prejudice the claims alleging violations of the Federal Civil False Claims Act and the false claims acts of certain states. In 2010,
plaintiff filed an amended complaint containing allegations concerning violations of the Federal Civil False Claims Act and the false
claims acts of certain states that are substantially similar to the allegations in the original complaint.
Chantix/Champix
A number of individual lawsuits have been filed against us in various federal and state courts alleging suicide, attempted suicide and
other personal injuries as a result of the purported ingesting of Chantix, as well as economic loss. Plaintiffs in these actions seek
compensatory and punitive damages and the disgorgement of profits resulting from the sale of Chantix. In October 2009, the federal
cases were transferred for consolidated pre-trial proceedings to a Multi-District Litigation (In re Chantix (Varenicline) Products
Liability Litigation MDL-2092) in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.
Beginning in December 2008, purported class actions were filed against us in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Toronto
Region), the Superior Court of Quebec (District of Montreal), the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta, Judicial District of Calgary, and
the Superior Court of British Columbia (Vancouver Registry) on behalf of all individuals and third-party payers in Canada who have
purchased and ingested Champix or reimbursed patients for the purchase of Champix. Each of these actions asserts claims under
Canadian product liability law, including with respect to the safety and efficacy of Champix, and, on behalf of the putative class,
seeks monetary relief, including punitive damages. The actions in Quebec, Alberta and British Columbia have been stayed pending
the decision regarding class certification in the Ontario action.
Bapineuzumab
In June 2010, a purported class action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against Pfizer, as successor
to Wyeth, and several former officers of Wyeth. The complaint alleges that Wyeth and the individual defendants violated federal
securities laws by making or causing Wyeth to make false and misleading statements, and by failing to disclose or causing Wyeth to
fail to disclose material information, concerning the results of a clinical trial involving bapineuzumab, a product in development for
the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. The plaintiff seeks to represent a class consisting of all persons who purchased Wyeth
securities from May 21, 2007 through July 2008 and seeks damages in an unspecified amount on behalf of the purported class.
In July 2010, a related action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Elan Corporation
(Elan), certain directors and officers of Elan, and Pfizer, as successor to Wyeth. This action asserts claims on behalf of purchasers
of call options of Elan, a company that jointly developed bapineuzumab with Wyeth until September 2009. The complaint alleges
that Elan, Wyeth and the individual defendants violated federal securities laws by making or causing Elan to make false and
misleading statements, and by failing to disclose or causing Elan to fail to disclose material information, concerning the results of a
clinical trial involving bapineuzumab. The plaintiff seeks to represent a class consisting of all persons who purchased Elan call
options from June 17, 2008 through July 29, 2008 and seeks damages in an unspecified amount on behalf of the purported class.
Thimerosal
Wyeth is a defendant in a number of suits by or on behalf of vaccine recipients alleging that exposure through vaccines to
cumulative doses of thimerosal, a preservative used in certain childhood vaccines formerly manufactured and distributed by Wyeth
and other vaccine manufacturers, caused severe neurological damage and/or autism in children. While several suits were filed as
purported nationwide or statewide class actions, all of the purported class actions have been dismissed, either by the courts or
voluntarily by the plaintiffs. In addition to the suits alleging injury from exposure to thimerosal, certain of the cases were brought by
parents in their individual capacities for, among other things, loss of services and loss of consortium of the injured child.
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (the Vaccine Act) requires that persons alleging injury from childhood vaccines first file a
petition in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims asserting a vaccine-related injury. At the conclusion of that proceeding, petitioners may
bring a lawsuit against the manufacturer in federal or state court, provided that they have satisfied certain procedural requirements.
Also under the terms of the Vaccine Act, if a petition has not been adjudicated by the U.S. Court of Federal Claims within a specified
time period after filing, the petitioner may opt out of the proceeding and pursue a lawsuit against the manufacturer by following
106 2010 Financial Report