boosting their profits<\/a> while inflating insulin costs for Americans.\u00a0<\/p>\nIn separate motions filed Tuesday night with the FTC, the companies argued that all three commissioners have an extensive track record of making public statements that indicate allegedly serious bias against the companies’ so-called pharmacy benefit managers.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The companies accused Khan, as well as Commissioners Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, of incorrectly asserting that PBMs are “price gougers” that hold significant control over the pricing and access to drugs like insulin. CVS said those statements demonstrate that the commissioners have “prejudged this matter,” so their participation in the case “violates due process.”\u00a0<\/p>\n
“If the opposite of ‘complete fairness’ is ‘blatant bias,’ the Three Commissioners would easily satisfy even that standard,” CVS wrote in a 23-page motion.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, UnitedHealth’s 17-page motion said, “Any judge who made these remarks about a litigant at the outset of a lawsuit would immediately need to recuse for blatant bias.”<\/p>\n
Cigna, in one of three motions filed, said Khan has “prejudged the facts and law relating to this action.”<\/p>\n
“She has repeatedly and wrongly asserted that PBMs ‘control’ drug pricing and patient access to drugs,” Cigna said.<\/p>\n
The FTC filed its complaint through its so-called administrative process, which initiates a proceeding before an administrative judge at the agency who would hear the case and issue an opinion. FTC commissioners then vote on that opinion.<\/p>\n
The FTC on Wednesday declined CNBC’s request for comment on the motion.\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n