Skip to main content

Blue Cross Blue Shield Antitrust Litigation

Related Lawyers: Michael D. Hausfeld, Arthur N. Bailey, Jr., Swathi Bojedla, Megan E. Jones, Scott Martin, Kimberly Fetsick
Related Practice Areas: Antitrust / Competition

If you have questions about the BCBS Settlement, please click here to fill out an inquiry form so that we may best assist you.


In re Blue Cross Blue Shield Antitrust Litigation, MDL 2406 (N.D. Ala.) alleges that Blue Cross/Blue Shield entities across the country have entered into agreements not to compete with each other for customers of health insurance.  Michael Hausfeld was appointed co-lead counsel, and his founding partner Megan Jones was appointed to the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee.  As such, since their appointment, Hausfeld LLP personnel have been instrumental in designing and executing the strategy of this case.  Art Bailey, another Hausfeld partner, was appointed to the Discovery Committee.

The litigation seeks damages on behalf of a class of tens of millions of subscribers, along with injunctive relief that would increase competition in the market for health insurance.

In 2014, Judge Proctor denied the Defendant Blues motions to dismiss, and the case proceeded into discovery against more than thirty defendants. In October 2015, the Court held that in order to streamline the action as a whole, the case against Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama and Blue Cross Blue Shield Association would proceed on an accelerated basis.  Discovery for the accelerated actions closed in December 2017.

In 2017, Plaintiffs moved for a summary judgment finding that agreements between the Blues to allocate territories should be accorded per se treatment under the Sherman Act.  Plaintiffs also moved for a finding that Blue Cross Blue Shield Association rules that limit unbranded competition between the Blues should similarly be treated under a per se standard.  These motions were based on extensive documentary evidence in which the Blues readily admit the anticompetitive nature of their rules. On April 5, 2018, the Court granted Plaintiffs' motion and found that the challenged restraints are subject to per se review under the Sherman Act.

On November 30, 2020, the Court granted preliminary approval to a proposed settlement agreement resolving the claims of Blue Cross Blue Shield subscribers. The Court’s opinion can be found here.

Supporting Documents

Related Lawyers