New: a trial court in 1 of every 10 U.S. counties. Read the post
Court Rules
All enforcement actions
SettlementHigh RiskMultistate

Attorney General Tong Announces $29.6 Million Settlement with Glenmark Over Conspiracy to Inflate Prices and Limit Competition

GlenmarkJuly 15, 2026Connecticut Attorney General

Penalty Amount

$29,600,000

Summary

Attorney General William Tong led a coalition of 48 states and territories in a $29.6 million settlement with Glenmark, a generic drug manufacturer, to resolve allegations of a widespread conspiracy to artificially inflate prices, reduce competition, and unreasonably restrain trade for numerous generic prescription drugs. The settlement includes cooperation from Glenmark in ongoing multistate litigations and internal reforms to ensure fair competition and compliance with antitrust laws.

Remedy

Glenmark must pay $29.6 million, cooperate in ongoing multistate litigations, and implement internal reforms to ensure fair competition and compliance with antitrust laws. Consumers who purchased certain generic prescription drugs between May 1, 2009 and December 31, 2019 may be eligible for compensation.

Monetary PenaltyCompliance ProgramReporting RequirementsInjunction

Contract Impact

In-house legal teams should review vendor agreements with generic drug manufacturers for clauses related to pricing, market allocation, and competition. Specifically, contracts should include robust antitrust compliance provisions, prohibitions on price fixing and market division, and requirements for cooperation with regulatory investigations. Additionally, customer agreements with pharmacies and healthcare providers should be reviewed for any terms that could be construed as anti-competitive, such as exclusive dealing arrangements or resale price maintenance clauses. Employee agreements and training programs should also be updated to emphasize antitrust law compliance and reporting mechanisms for potential violations.

Contract Search Terms

price fixingantitrust compliancegeneric drug pricingmarket allocationcompetition lawfair competition clausecollusionrestraint of tradecooperation with regulatorsinternal compliance reforms

Laws Cited

Connecticut Antitrust ActSherman Antitrust Act
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-23415 U.S.C. § 1

Violation Types

Entity Details

Entity

Glenmark

Industry

Other

Multistate Coalition

AlaskaArizonaCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareDistrict of ColumbiaFloridaGeorgiaIdahoIllinoisIndianaIowaKansasKentuckyMaineMarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesotaMississippiMontanaNebraskaNevadaNew HampshireNew JerseyNew MexicoNew YorkNorth CarolinaNorth DakotaNorthern Mariana IslandsOhioOklahomaOregonPennsylvaniaRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaTennesseeUtahU.S. Virgin IslandsVermontVirginiaWashingtonWest VirginiaWisconsinWyomingPuerto Rico

Official Sources

Source Evidence

Entity Name
"Glenmark"
Fine Amount
"$29.6 million settlement with Glenmark"
Laws Cited
"antitrust laws"
Violation Types
"conspired with manufacturers across the generic drug industry jack up prices and block competition for generic prescription drugs"
Is Multistate
"coalition of 48 states and territories"
Remedy Types
"internal reforms to ensure fair competition and compliance with antitrust laws"

Related Enforcement Actions

CT

Glenmark

$29.6M

Attorney General Jennifer Davenport joined a coalition of 48 states and territories in a $29.6 million settlement with Glenmark, a generic drug manufacturer, for allegedly conspiring to artificially inflate and manipulate prices, reduce competition, and restrain trade for numerous generic prescription drugs. The settlement includes cooperation in ongoing litigations and internal reforms to ensure fair competition.

CT

Frontier Communications Parent Inc.

$625K

Connecticut reached a $625,000 settlement with Frontier Communications Parent Inc. over an April 2024 breach in which compromised employee and vendor credentials were used to access internal systems and exfiltrate unencrypted personal information of 58,841 Connecticut residents. The settlement requires Frontier to strengthen its security program, implement specific safeguards and training, and obtain an independent third-party assessment.

CT

Boston Children’s Health Physicians and XTIUM

$2.6M

Connecticut and New York found that Boston Children’s Health Physicians and its security vendor, XTIUM, failed to use reasonable safeguards, resulting in hackers accessing sensitive personal, medical, and employee information. The companies agreed to pay penalties totaling $2.64 million and implement enhanced cybersecurity measures.

CT

Character Technologies, Inc.

Connecticut joined a coalition of state attorneys general filing a notice in Character Technologies, Inc.’s bankruptcy proceedings, raising concerns about the company’s safety and privacy practices and the sensitive information it holds. The states seek protections for children and consumers if the company’s business or assets are sold or transferred; the filing does not impose a fine or other remedy.

CT

Connecticut public utilities

Attorney General William Tong and Consumer Counsel Claire Coleman petitioned PURA to review how Connecticut public utilities use artificial intelligence, citing potential data privacy and cybersecurity risks, algorithmic errors, and misleading outputs. The petition asks PURA to examine utility AI systems, safeguards, vendors, and data security practices; it does not report a finding of violation or an imposed penalty.

CT

RZ Smoke, Inc.

$2.0M

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong announced a settlement with RZ Smoke, Inc. over allegations that it distributed and sold high-potency cannabis products without a state license. The stipulated judgment is $2 million, with $375,000 payable to the State and $1.6 million suspended to ensure compliance; the company is barred from specified cannabis activities in Connecticut unless licensed.