Court Rules
All enforcement actions
SettlementCritical RiskMultistate

Attorney General Davenport Announces $400 Million Settlement in Principle with Sandoz Over Conspiracy to Inflate Prices and Limit Competition

Sandoz Inc.August 4, 2026New Jersey Attorney General

Penalty Amount

$400,000,000

Summary

Attorney General Jennifer Davenport joined a coalition of 43 states and territories in announcing a $400 million settlement in principle with Sandoz Inc. to resolve allegations of widespread price-fixing and anticompetitive conduct in the generic drug market. Sandoz will pay approximately $469 million total including prior settlements, and has agreed to internal reforms to ensure fair competition.

Remedy

Sandoz will pay $400 million as part of this settlement (with total payments of approximately $469 million including prior settlements) and has agreed to meaningful injunctive terms including internal reforms to ensure fair competition and compliance with antitrust laws.

Monetary PenaltyInjunctionCompliance Program

Contract Impact

In-house legal teams should review vendor and customer agreements in the pharmaceutical supply chain for any clauses that could facilitate price-fixing or market allocation, such as most-favored-nation clauses, resale price maintenance, or information sharing provisions. They should also ensure that compliance programs include antitrust training and that contracts include representations and warranties regarding compliance with antitrust laws. Additionally, any agreements with competitors, such as joint ventures or co-marketing arrangements, should be scrutinized for potential collusion risks.

Contract Search Terms

antitrust complianceprice fixingcollusionmarket allocationfair competitiongeneric drug pricingcompetitor communicationstrade association meetingsbid riggingrestraint of trade

Laws Cited

Sherman ActState Antitrust Laws

Violation Types

Entity Details

Entity

Sandoz Inc.

Industry

Healthcare

Multistate Coalition

Official Sources

Source Evidence

Entity Name
"Sandoz Inc."
Fine Amount
"$400 million settlement in principle"
Laws Cited
"antitrust laws"
Violation Types
"conspiracies to artificially inflate and manipulate prices, reduce competition, and unreasonably restrain trade"

Related Enforcement Actions

CT

Sandoz Inc.

$400.0M

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison joined a coalition of 43 states and territories in announcing a $400 million settlement in principle with Sandoz Inc. to resolve allegations that the generic drug manufacturer engaged in conspiracies to artificially inflate and manipulate prices, reduce competition, and unreasonably restrain trade for numerous generic prescription drugs. Sandoz will pay approximately $469 million total including prior settlements, and has agreed to injunctive terms and internal reforms.

CT

Sandoz Inc.

$400.0M

Attorney General Tong led a coalition of 43 states and territories in announcing a $400 million settlement in principle with Sandoz Inc. to resolve allegations that the generic drug manufacturer engaged in conspiracies to artificially inflate and manipulate prices, reduce competition, and unreasonably restrain trade. Sandoz will pay approximately $469 million total and implement internal reforms to ensure fair competition and compliance with antitrust laws.

CO

Sandoz Inc.

$400.0M

Attorney General Phil Weiser joined a coalition of 43 states and territories announcing a $400 million settlement in principle with Sandoz Inc. to resolve allegations that the generic drug manufacturer engaged in conspiracies to artificially inflate and manipulate prices, reduce competition, and unreasonably restrain trade. Sandoz will pay approximately $469 million including previous settlements and agreed to meaningful reforms to ensure fair competition and compliance with antitrust laws.

NJ

Credit Acceptance Corporation (CAC)

$694.0M

New Jersey's Attorney General and Division of Consumer Affairs, along with 41 Attorneys General, reached a $694 million settlement with subprime auto lender Credit Acceptance Corporation over allegations it originated unaffordable loans its own systems predicted borrowers could not repay, employed aggressive debt-collection tactics, and failed to prevent deceptive vehicle-service contract and GAP product 'packing' by dealers. The multistate settlement stepped in after the CFPB permanently dropped its 2023 enforcement action against CAC in 2025. CAC will provide $60 million in cash restitution, $634 million in debt relief, an additional $15 million to the states, and implement injunctive lending reforms including loan off ramps, pre-loan disclosures, add-on packing safeguards, and a seven-year vehicle price cap. Note: this is a consumer-protection lending enforcement action, not a privacy matter; violation categories are best-fit mappings from the available taxonomy.

NJ

Match Group, Inc.

$650K

The New Jersey Attorney General and Division of Consumer Affairs announced that Match Group, Inc. will pay $650,000 and change its business practices to settle allegations that it misrepresented or failed to disclose its criminal background screening policies and practices to New Jersey users, violating the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and the Internet Dating Safety Act. Under a Consent Order, Match must accurately represent its screening policies, notify existing New Jersey members of updated disclosures within 150 days, and post clear and conspicuous disclosures and safety notifications about the limitations of criminal background screenings.

NJ

Amazon

On August 31, 2026, New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport and the Division of Consumer Affairs joined the FTC and a bipartisan coalition of 21 other states in suing Amazon, alleging that for over seven years the company secretly rigged its advertising auctions—converting advertised 'second price' auctions into first-price auctions with hidden 'soft reserve price' surcharges—overcharging more than 500,000 small- and medium-sized businesses and extracting tens of billions of dollars. The complaint alleges Amazon actively concealed the surcharges, gave false and misleading answers to advertisers who asked directly about the auction format, and applied inflated upcharges on high-volume shopping days like Prime Day and Black Friday. The lawsuit was just filed; no penalties or remedies have been imposed yet.