A plaintiff in a case against Johnson & Johnson has had her claims partially dismissed by a New Jersey district court after the judge determined she lacked Article III standing to bring the case.
The plaintiff in Lewandowski v. Johnson and Johnson alleged that J&J “breached [its] fiduciary duties” and “mismanaged” its prescription-drug benefits program by brokering a deal whereby drugs were upsold to its employees through a pharmacy benefit manager that employees were incentivized to use.
This alleged mismanagement led to employees’ plans costing more in the form of higher premiums, deductibles, copays, coinsurance and more expensive prescription drugs, all in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, plaintiffs said.
In its motion to dismiss, J&J asserted that the plaintiff did “not allege a concrete harm or injury-in-fact” — a claim with which the court largely agreed.
Regarding the first count, the notion that the plaintiff suffered an injury-of-fact due to higher premiums, deductibles and other costs was “speculative and hypothetical,” the judge said.
And while the court agreed the plaintiff suffered an injury due to higher prescription drug costs, the court found she lacked standing because “a favorable decision would not be able to compensate [her] for the money she already paid,” and therefore would not be “redressed by judicial relief,” as Article III requires.
The court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the third count, however, which asserted that J&J failed to provide documents related to her plan.
The plaintiff’s allegations “support[ed] a claim that a written request from a participant or beneficiary was made, and that Defendants failed to respond within thirty days” as is required by ERISA, the judge found.