10e. Allergan Settlement Agreement — Downey City Council, April 11, 2023 (part 2 of 2)

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD) 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Board of Education
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
ME
of Maine School
County Public Schools, Bangor School
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
Administrative
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
(Federal)
District 15
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU) 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
C-142

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
Board of Education
County Public Schools, Bangor School
of Maine School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
ME
Administrative
District, Maine Regional School Unit
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
District 28 Five
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
(Federal)
Town Central
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
School District
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Board of Education of Thornton Township
Board of Education
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
ME
of Maine School
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
Administrative
School District, Mason County Public
(Federal)
District 35
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
C-143

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD) H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department, Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Board of Education
Public Schools, Martin County Public
ME
of Maine School
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
Administrative
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
(Federal)
District 55
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57 Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
C-146

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Board of Education
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
ME
of Maine School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
Administrative
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
(Federal)
District 6
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57 Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

ME
Board of Education
Board of Education of Thornton Township
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
of Maine School
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Federal
C-147

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Administrative
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
District 61
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department, Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Board of Education
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
ME
of Maine School
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
Administrative
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
(Federal)
District 72
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
C-148

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Board of Education
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
ME
of Scarborough
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
School Department
Public Schools, Martin County Public
(Federal)
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU) 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57 Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
C-150

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
Board of Education
County Public Schools, Bangor School
ME
of South Portland
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
School Department
District, Maine Regional School Unit
(Federal)
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
C-151

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Board of Education
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
ME
of St. George
District, Maine Regional School Unit
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
Municipal School
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
(Federal)
District
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Board of Education
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
ME
of Waterville School
School District, Mason County Public
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
Department
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
(Federal)
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
C-152

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD) H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

ME
City of Auburn
City of Auburn v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45188
N.D. Ohio
al.
(Federal)
ME
City of Augusta
City of Augusta v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:1.9-op-45182
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ME
City of Bangor
City of Bangor v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-46314
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ME
City of Biddeford
City of Biddeford v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45258
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
ME
City of Calais
The City of Calais, Maine v. Teva
1:20-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
ME
City of Lewiston
City of Lewiston v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-46315
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
ME
City of Portland
City of Portland v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-46313
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
ME
City of Rockland
City of Rockland v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45823
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
C-153

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
ME
City of Saco
City of Saco v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:19-op-45310
N.D. Ohio
Federal
ME
City of Sanford
City of Sanford v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45311
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ME
City of Waterville
City of Waterville v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45193
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
ME
County of
Androscoggin County v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45205
N.D. Ohio
Androscoggin
L.P., et al.

Federal
ME
County of
Aroostook County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45183
N.D. Ohio
Aroostook
et al.

Federal
ME
County of
Cumberland County v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45259
N.D. Ohio
Cumberland
L.P., et al.

Federal
ME
County of Kennebec
Kennebec County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45257
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
ME
County of Knox
Knox County, State of Maine v. Purdue
1:19-op-45822
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
ME
County of Lincoln
Lincoln County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45190
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ME
County of
Penobscot County v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45184
N.D. Ohio
Penobscot
L.P., et al.

Federal
ME
County of
Sagadahoe County v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45189
N.D. Ohio
Sa adahoc
L.P., et al.

Federal
ME
County of Somerset
Somerset County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45186
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
ME
County of Waldo
Waldo County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45309
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ME
County of
Washington County v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45185
N.D. Ohio
Washington
L.P., et al.

Federal
ME
County of York
fork County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:1.9-op-45191
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
Charter Township of Canton, City of
Livonia, Charter of Township of
MI
Charter Township of
Northville, City of Romulus, Charter
1:18-op-46134
N.D. Ohio
Canton
Township of Van Buren, City of Wayne
(Federal)
and Charter Township of Huron,
Michigan v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

MI
Charter Township of
Charter Township of Clinton, Michigan v.
1:18-op-46135
N.D. Ohio
Clinton
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
MI
Charter Township of
Charter Township of Harrison v. The
1:19-op-45863
N.D. Ohio
Harrison
Pain Center USA, PLLC, et al.
(Federal)
Charter Township of Canton, City of
Livonia, Charter of Township of
MI
Charter Township of
Northville, City of Romulus, Charter
1:18-op-46134
N.D. Ohio
Huron
Township of Van Buren, City of Wayne
(Federal)
and Charter Township of Huron,
Michigan v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Charter Township of Canton, City of
Livonia, Charter of Township of
MI
Charter Township of
Northville, City ofRomulus, Charter
1:18-op-46134
N.D. Ohio
Northville
Township of Van Buren, City of Wayne
(Federal)
and Charter Township of Huron,
Michigan v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

C-154

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MI
Charter Township of
Charter Township of Pittsfield, Michigan
1:19-op-45566
N.D. Ohio
Pittsfield
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Charter Township of Canton, City of
Livonia, Charter of Township of
MI
Charter Township of
Northville, City of Romulus, Charter
1: 1 8-op-46134
N.D. Ohio
Van Buren
Township of Van Buren, City of Wayne
(Federal)
and Charter Township of Huron,
Michigan v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

MI
City of Detroit
City of Detroit, Michigan v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45084
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
City of East Lansing
City of East Lansing, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45902
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
City of Escanaba
City of Escanaba, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45068
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
City of Flint
City of Flint v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:19-op-45122
N.D. Ohio
Federal
MI
City of Grand
City of Grand Rapids, Michigan v.
1:18-op-45406
N.D. Ohio
Rapids
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
City of Iron
City oflron Mountain, Michigan v.
1:18-op-45344
N.D. Ohio
Mountain
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
City of Jackson
City ofdackson, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45904
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
City of Lansing
City of Lansing, Michigan v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45054
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Charter Township of Canton, City of
Livonia, Charter of Township of
MI
City of Livonia
Northville, City of Romulus, Charter
1:18-op-46134
N.D. Ohio
Township of Van Buren, City of Wayne
(Federal)
and Charter Township of Huron,
Michigan v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

City of Pontiac, Michigan v.

N.D. Ohio
MI
City of Pontiac
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-46183
(Federal)
al.

Charter Township of Canton, City of
Livonia, Charter of Township of
MI
City of Romulus
Northville, City of Romulus, Charter
1:18-op-46134
N.D. Ohio
Township of Van Buren, City of Wayne
(Federal)
and Charter Township of Huron,
Michigan v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

MI
City of Sault Sainte
City of Sault Sainte Marie, Michigan v.
1:18-op-45928
N.D. Ohio
Marie
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
City of Sterling
City of Sterling Heights v. The Pain
1:19-op-45864
N.D. Ohio
Heights
Center USA, PLLC, et al.

Federal
MI
City of Traverse
City of Traverse City, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45901
N.D. Ohio
City
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
City of Warren
City of Warren v. The Pain Center USA,
1:19-op-45865
N.D. Ohio
PLLC, et al.

Federal
Charter Township of Canton, City of
Livonia, Charter of Township of
MI
City of Wayne
Northville, City of Romulus, Charter
1:18-op-46134
N.D. Ohio
Township of Van Buren, City of Wayne
(Federal)
and Charter Township of Huron,
Michigan v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

C-155

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MI
City of Westland
City of Westland, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45903
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
Count of Saginaw
Count of Saginaw, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45082
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Alcona
County of'Alcona, Michigan v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45340
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Alger
County of'Alger, Michigan v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45360
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Alpena
County of'Alpena, Michigan v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45871
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Antrim
County of'Antrim, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45354
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Arenac
County of'Arenac, Michigan v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45341
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Baraga
County of Baraga, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45361
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Bay
The County ofBay, Michigan v. Purdue
1:19-op-45228
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Benzie
County ofBenzie, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45356
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Berrien
County ofBerrien, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45887
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Branch
Branch County, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-46096
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Calhoun
Calhoun County, Michigan v. Purdue
1:19-op-45560
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Cass
County of Cass, Michigan v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45868
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of
County of'Charlevoix, Michigan v.
1:1.8-op-45897
N.D. Ohio
Charlevoix
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of
County of Cheboygan v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45636
N.D. Ohio
Cheboygan
L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Chippewa
County of Chippewa, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45066
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Clinton
County of Clinton, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45889
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Crawford
County of Crawford, Michigan, v. Purdue
1:18-op-45105
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Delta
County ofDelta, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45067
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
MI
County of
County of Dickinson, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45342
N.D. Ohio
Dickinson
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
MI
County of Eaton
County ofEaton, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45971
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Genesee
County of Genesee, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45083
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Grand
County of Grand Traverse, Michigan v.
1:18-op-45056
N.D. Ohio
Traverse
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Gratiot
County of Gratiot, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45339
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Hillsdale
County of Hillsdale, Michigan v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45355
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al
Federal
C-156

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MI
County of Houghton
County of Houghton, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45866
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Ingham
County of Ingham, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-46178
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Ionia
County oflonia, Michigan v. Purdue
1:19-op-45261
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of losco
County of Iosco, Michigan v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45343
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al
Federal
MI
County of Iron
County of'Iron, Michigan v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45888
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Isabella
County of'Isabella, Michigan v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45349
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of
Kalamazoo County, Michigan v. Purdue
1:19-op-45561
N.D. Ohio
Kalamazoo
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Kent
County of Kent, Michigan v. Purdue
1:19-op-45000
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Lake
County of Lake, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45366
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Leelanau
County of Leelanau, Michigan, v. Purdue
1:18-op-45111
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Lenawee
County ofLenawee, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45351
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of
County of Livingston, Michigan v. Purdue
1:19-op-45262
N.D. Ohio
Livingston
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Luce
County of Luce, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45362
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Macomb
Count of Macomb, Michigan v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45085
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Manistee
County of'Manistee, Michigan, v. Purdue
1:1.8-op-45113
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of
County of Marquette, Michigan, v.
1:18-op-45104
N.D. Ohio
Marquette
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Mason
County ofMason, Michigan, v. Purdue
1:18-op-45112
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Monroe
County ofMonroe v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45158
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of
County ofMontcalm, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45865
N.D. Ohio
Montcalm
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
MI
County of
County of Montmorency v. Purdue
1:18-op-45347
N.D. Ohio
MontmorencyPharma
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
MI
County of
Muskegon County, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-46199
N.D. Ohio
Muskegon
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
MI
County of Newaygo
County of Newaygo, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-46187
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Oakland
County of Wayne and County of Oakland
1:17-op-45102
N.D. Ohio
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Oceana
County of Oceana, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45359
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Ogemaw
County of Ogemaw, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45348
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of
County of Ontonagon, Michigan v.
1: 1 8-op-45893
N.D. Ohio
Ontonagon
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
C-157

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MI
County of Osceola
County of Osceola, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45357
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Otsego
County of Otsego, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45345
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Presque
County of *Presque Isle, Michigan v.
1: 1 8-op-45894
N.D. Ohio
Isle
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of
County of Roscommon, Michigan, v.
1: 1 8-op-45102
N.D. Ohio
Roscommon
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Sanilac
County ofSanilac, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45352
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of
County of*Shiawassee, Michigan v.
1: 1 8-op-45350
N.D. Ohio
Shiawassee
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of St. Clair
County ofSt. Clair, Michigan v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45896
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Tuscola
County of Tuscola v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45870
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of
County of Washtenaw, Michigan v.
1:18-op-45886
N.D. Ohio
Washtenaw
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Wayne
County of Wayne and County of Oakland
1:17-op-45102
N.D. Ohio
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MI
County of Wexford
County of Wexford, Michigan v. Purdue
1:18-op-45364
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al
Federal
MI
Detroit Wayne
Mental Health
Detroit Wayne Mental Health Authority v.
1:18-op-46332
N.D. Ohio
Authority
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Board of Education
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
MN
of Minnetonka
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
School District No.

Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
(Federal)
276
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District "SAD' 11,
C-158

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

MN
City of Coon Rapids
City of Coon Rapids, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45835
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
City of Duluth
City of Duluth, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45304
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
City of Minneapolis
Minneapolis, Minnesota v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45850
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
City of North St.

City of North St. Paul, Minnesota v.
1:19-op-46066
N.D. Ohio
Paul
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
City of Proctor
City of Proctor, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45748
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
City of Rochester
City of Rochester, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45501
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
City of Saint Paul
City of Saint Paul, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45424
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
MN
County of Anoka
County ofAnoka, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:18-op-45101
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
MN
County of Beltrami
Beltrami County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45776
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
MN
County of Big Stone
Big Stone County v. Teva
1:20-op-45102
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Carlton
Carlton County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45608
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Carver
Carver County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45798
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Dakota
Dakota County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-46112
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
MN
County of Douglas
Douglas County, Minnesota v. Teva
1:18-op-45428
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Freeborn
Freeborn County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45737
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Hennepin
Hennepin County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:18-op-45232
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Itasca
Itasca County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:18-op-45958
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of McLeod
McLeod County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45332
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
C-159

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MN
County of Meeker
Meeker County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45343
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Morrison
Morrison County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:18-op-45429
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Mower
Mower County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1: 1 7-op-45072
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Olmsted
Olmsted County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45547
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Pine
fine County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45738
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Ramsey
Ramsey County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1: 1 7-op-45073
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Roseau
Roseau County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45344
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Sibley
Sibley County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45333
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of St. Louis
St. Louis County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:18-op-45430
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Steele County, Minnesota, Waseca
MN
County of Steele
County, Minnesota, Minnesota Prairie
1:19-op-45800
N.D. Ohio
Health Alliance v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
(Federal)
et al.

Steele County, Minnesota, Waseca
MN
County of Waseca
County, Minnesota, Minnesota Prairie
1:19-op-45800
N.D. Ohio
Health Alliance v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
(Federal)
et al.

MN
County of
Washington County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:17-op-45074
N.D. Ohio
Washington
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Winona
Winona County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:1.9-op-45271
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Wright
Wright County, Minnesota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45661
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MN
County of Yellow
Yellow Medicine County, Minnesota v.
1:19-op-45358
N.D. Ohio
Medicine
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Steele County, Minnesota, Waseca
MN
Minnesota Prairie
County, Minnesota, Minnesota Prairie
1:19-op-45800
N.D. Ohio
Health Alliance
Health Alliance v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
(Federal)
et al.

Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City of Independence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
City of
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
Independence
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1:1.9-op-45371
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City oflndependence,
MO
City of Joplin
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
1:19-op-45371
N.D. Ohio
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
(Federal)
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
C-160

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

MO
City of Kansas City
City of Kansas City, Missouri v. Teva
1: 1 8-op-46029
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
The City of Sedalia, Pettis County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
City of Sedalia
Missouri v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:20-op-45152
(Federal)
Inc., et al.

MO
City of Springfield
The City of Springfield, Missouri v.
1: 1 8-op-45899
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
City of St. Joseph, Missouri v.

N.D. Ohio
MO
City of St. Joseph
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45798
(Federal)
al.

MO
City of St. Louis
City of St. Louis v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-46267
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
MO
County of Adair
Adair County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45297
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Andrew
Andrew County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45298
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
Atchison County, Missouri v.

N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Atchison
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45797
(Federal)
al.

MO
County of Audrain
Audrain County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:18-op-46265
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Barry
Barry County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:21-op-45016
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Barton
Barton County, Missouri v. Teva
1:20-op-45171
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Boone
Boone County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:1.9-op-45375
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Buchanan County, Missouri v.

N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Buchanan
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45028
(Federal)
al.

Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City of Independence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Butler
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1: 19-op-453 71
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

MO
County of Callaway
Callaway County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:19-op-45378
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Camden
Camden County v. Dannie E. Williams,
1:20-op-45068
N.D. Ohio
M.D., et al.

Federal
Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City oflndependence,
County of Cape
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
N.D. Ohio
MO
Girardeau
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
1:19-op-45371
(Federal)
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
C-161

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

Cass County, Missouri v.

N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Cass
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45841
(Federal)
al.

MO
County of Chariton
Chariton County, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:19-op-45790
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City of Independence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Christian
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1:19-op-45371
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

MO
County of Clinton
Clinton County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:20-op-45130
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Cole
Cole County, Missouri v. Purdue Pharma,
1:18-op-46189
N.D. Ohio
Inc., et al.

Federal
Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City of Independence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Crawford
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1:19-op-45371
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

MO
County of Dade
Dade County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45224
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
MO
County of DeKalb
Dekalb County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45299
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City of Independence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Dent
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1:1.9-op-45371
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

MO
County of Douglas
Douglas County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:19-op-45386
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City oflndependence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Dunklin
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1:19-op-45371
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

C-162

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MO - Circuit
MO
County of Franklin
Franklin County v. Dannie E. Williams
20AB-CC00006
Court of
Franklin
M.D., et al.

County
State
MO
County of
Gasconade County, Missouri v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-46190
N.D. Ohio
Gasconade
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City of Independence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Greene
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1:19-op-45371
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

MO
County of Grundy
Grundy County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45300
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Henry
Henry County, Missouri v. Teva
1:20-op-45135
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Hickory
Hickory County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45295
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City of Independence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Iron
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1:19-op-45371
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

MO
County of Jackson
Jackson County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:1.8-op-45965
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City of Independence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Jasper
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1:19-op-45371
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

MO - Circuit
MO
County of Jefferson
Jefferson County v. Donnie E. Williams
20JE-CC00029
Court of
Jefferson
M.D., et al.

County
State
MO
County of Knox
Knox County, Missouri v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45406
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
Lafayette County, Missouri v.

N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Lafayette
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45840
(Federal)
al.

C-163

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MO
County of Lawrence
Lawrence County, Missouri v. Teva
1:20-op-45134
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Lewis
Lewis County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:18-op-46263
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Lincoln
Lincoln County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45069
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
County of
Livingston County, Missouri v.

N.D. Ohio
MO
Livingston
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46168
(Federal)
Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City of Independence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Madison
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1:19-op-45371
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

MO
County of Maries
Maries County, Missouri v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-46194
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of
McDonald County, Missouri v. Teva
1:20-op-45225
N.D. Ohio
McDonald
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Miller
Miller County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:19-op-45274
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Moniteau
Moniteau County, Missouri v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-46352
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of
Montgomery County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:18-0p-46197
N.D. Ohio
Montgomery
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of New
New Madrid County v. Teva
1:20-op-45296
N.D. Ohio
Madrid
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
Nodaway County, Missouri v.

N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Nodaway
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45795
(Federal)
al.

MO
County of Osage
Osage County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:18-op-46191
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
MO
County of Ozark
Ozark County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:18-op-46198
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
MO
County of Pemiscot
Pemiscot County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:19-op-45733
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City of Independence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Perry
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1:19-op-45371
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

Pettis County, Missouri v. Purdue
MO
County of Pettis
Pharma L.P., et al. / The City of Sedalia,
1:19-op-45416 /
N.D. Ohio
Pettis County, Missouri v. Teva
1:20-op-45152
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

C-164

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MO
County of Phelps
Phelps County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:18-op-46195
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Pike
Pike County, Missouri v. Purdue Pharma
1:20-op-45131
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Polk
Polk County, Missouri v. Teva
1:20-op-45082
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Pulaski
Pulaski County, Missouri v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-46192
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Ralls
Ralls County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45292
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Randolph
Randolph County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:19-op-45409
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Ray
Ray County, Missouri v. Teva
1:20-op-45132
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Reynolds
Reynolds County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:18-op-46193
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Ripley
Ripley County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:18-op-46262
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Schuyler
Schuyler County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:19-op-45408
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Scott
Scott County, Missouri v. Teva
1:19-op-46174
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Shannon
Shannon County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:19-op-45401
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Shelby
Shelby County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:18-op-46264
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of St.

St. Charles County, Missouri v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-46059
N.D. Ohio
Charles
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of St. Clair
St. Clair County, Missouri v. Teva
1:21-op-45044
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MO
County of St.

St. Francois County v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45847
N.D. Ohio
Francois
L.P., et al.

Federal
MO
County of St. Louis
St. Louis County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45083
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City of Independence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
County of Ste.

County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
Genevieve
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1: 19-op-453 71
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City oflndependence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Stone
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1:19-op-45371
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

C-165

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City of Independence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Taney
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1:19-op-45371
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City oflndependence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Texas
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1:19-op-45371
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

MO
County of Vernon
Vernon County, Missouri v. Teva
1:20-op-45133
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MO
County of Warren
Warren County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-46196
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
Butler County, Cape Girardeau County,
Christian County, City oflndependence,
City of Joplin, Crawford County, Dent
County of
County, Dunklin County, Greene County,
N.D. Ohio
MO
Washington
Iron County, Jasper County, Madison
1:19-op-45371
(Federal)
County, Perry County, Ste. Genevieve,
Stone County, Taney County, Texas
County and Washington County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.

MO
County of Webster
Webster County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:1.8-op-46350
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al
Federal
Worth County, Missouri v.

N.D. Ohio
MO
County of Worth.

AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45777
(Federal)
al.

MO
County of Wright
Wright County, Missouri v. Purdue
1:19-op-45383
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Kinloch Fire
Kinloch Fire Protection District of St.

N.D. Ohio
MO
Protection District
Louis County, Missouri v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45665
(Federal)
of St. Louis Count
L.P., et al.

Northeast
Ambulance and Fire
Northeast Ambulance and Fire Protection
N.D. Ohio
MO
Protection District
District of St. Louis County, Missouri v.
1:19-op-45664
(Federal)
of St. Louis Count
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

City ofAmory, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of Amory
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45549
(Federal)
al.

MS
City of Brookhaven
City of Brookhaven, Mississippi v. Teva
1:19-op-461.43
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
City of Charleston, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of Charleston
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45398
(Federal)
al.

C-166

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MS
City of Clarksdale
City of Clarksdale v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45620
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
MS
City of Cleveland
City of Cleveland, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:19-op-45879
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al
Federal
City of Columbia, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of Columbia
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45048
(Federal)
al.

City of Columbus, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of Columbus
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-46286
(Federal)
al.

MS
City of
City of Diamondhead, Mississippi v.
1:19-op-45749
N.D. Ohio
Diainondhead
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MS
City of Gautier
City of Gautier, Mississippi v. Teva
1:19-op-45871
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MS
City of Greenwood
City of Greenwood v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45950
N.D. Ohio
DrugCor oration, et al.

Federal
MS
City of Grenada
City of Grenada v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45622
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
MS
City of Gulfport
The City of Gulfport, Mississippi v.
1:19-op-45291
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
City of Hattiesburg, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of Hattiesburg
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45512
(Federal)
al.

MS - Circuit
MS
City of Holly
City of Holly Springs v. Johnson &
CV2020-141
Court of
Marshall
Springs
Johnson, et al.

County
State
MS
City of Indianola
City of Indianola v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45624
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
City of Iuka, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of luka
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46172
(Federal)
al.

MS
City of Jackson
City of Jackson, Mississippi v. Teva
1:19-op-45806
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
MS
City of Jonestown
City of Jonestown v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45623
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
MS
City of Kosciusko
City of Kosciusko, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:19-op-45872
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
City ofLaurel, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of Laurel
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.8-op-46161
(Federal)
al.

MS
City of Long Beach
The City of Long Beach, Mississippi V.
1:19-op-45517
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
City of Lumberton, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of Lumberton
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46236
(Federal)
al.

City of Meridian, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of Meridian
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45969
(Federal)
al.

MS
City of Morton
City of Morton, Mississippi v. Teva
1:19-op-45882
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
C-167

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
MS
City of Moss Point
City of Moss Point, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:19-op-45880
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MS
City of Mound
City of Mound Bayou v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45422
N.D. Ohio
Bayou
L.P., et al.

Federal
City of Nettleton, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of Nettleton
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45151
(Federal)
al.

City of New Albany, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of New Albany
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45949
(Federal)
al.

MS
City of Ocean
City of Ocean Springs, Mississippi v.
1:19-op-45878
N.D. Ohio
Springs
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MS
City of Pascagoula
The City of Pascagoula, Mississippi v.
1:19-op-45934
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MS
City of Philadelphia
City ila elpL.P,Mississippi v.
1:18-op-45279
N.D.Ohio
Pharma , et l.

PurdueMS
City of Quitman
City of Quitman, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:19-op-45873
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
City of Shannon, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of Shannon
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45149
(Federal)
al.

City of Starkville, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of Starkville
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45148
(Federal)
al.

MS
City of Tupelo
City of Tupelo, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:19-op-45491
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
City of Verona, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of Verona
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45150
(Federal)
al.

MS
City of Vicksburg
City of Vicksburg, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:1.9-op-45881
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
City of Waynesboro v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of Waynesboro
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:21-op-45050
(Federal)
al.

MS
City of Webb
City of Webb, Mississippi v. Teva
1:21-op-45015
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
City of Wiggins, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
City of Wiggins
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45576
(Federal)
al.

Adams County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Adams
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.8-op-45831
(Federal)
al.

Amite County, Mississippi, v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Amite
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45097
(Federal)
al.

MS
County of Attala
Attala County, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:19-op-45869
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Benton County, Mississippi, V.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Benton
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45119
(Federal)
al.

MS
County of Bolivar
Bolivar County, Mississippi v. Teva
1:20-op-45214
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
C-168

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Carroll County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Carroll
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45156
(Federal)
al.

County of
Chickasaw County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
Chickasaw
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45158
(Federal)
MS
County of Claiborne
Claiborne County, Mississippi v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45035
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MS
County of Clarke
Clarke County, Mississippi v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45278
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MS
County of
Covington County, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:19-op-45417
N.D. Ohio
Covington
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Desoto County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Desoto
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45551
(Federal)
al.

Forrest County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Forrest
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45147
(Federal)
al.

Franklin County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Franklin
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45577
(Federal)
al.

George County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of George
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45157
(Federal)
al.

MS
County of Greene
Greene County, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:19-op-45965
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MS
County of Grenada
County of Grenada v. Purdue Pharma
1: 1 8-op-46279
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
Hancock County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Hancock
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.8-op-45762
(Federal)
al.

MS
County of Harrison
Harrison County v. McKesson
1:19-op-45113
N.D. Ohio
Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
MS
County of Hinds
Hinds County, Mississippi v. Teva
1:20-op-45190
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
Holmes County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Holmes
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45793
(Federal)
al.

MS
County of
Humphreys County, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:18-op-45021
N.D. Ohio
Humphreys
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MS
County of Issaquena
Issaquena County, Mississippi v.
1:18-op-45764
N.D. Ohio
McKesson Corporation, et al.

Federal
Itawamba County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Itawamba
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45396
(Federal)
al.

MS
County of Jackson
Jackson County, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:19-op-45876
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al
Federal
Jefferson County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Jefferson
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45839
(Federal)
al.

County of Jefferson
Jefferson Davis County, Mississippi, v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
Davis
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45070
(Federal)
C-169

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
MS
County of Jones
Jones County, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:19-op-45875
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MS
County of Kemper
Kemper County, Mississippi v. Teva
1:19-op-45870
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
LaFayette County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of LaFayette
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45341
(Federal)
al.

MS
County of
Lauderdale County, Mississippi v. Teva
1:19-op-46060
N.D. Ohio
Lauderdale
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
Lawrence County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Lawrence
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45036
(Federal)
al.

Lee County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Lee
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45160
(Federal)
al.

LeFlore County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of LeFlore
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45552
(Federal)
al.

Lincoln County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Lincoln
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45722
(Federal)
al.

MS
County of Madison
County of Madison, Mississippi v. Teva
1:20-op-45106
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
Marion County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Marion
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45075
(Federal)
al.

Marshall County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Marshall
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45397
(Federal)
al.

Monroe County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Monroe
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46173
(Federal)
al.

Neshoba County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Neshoba
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45843
(Federal)
al.

Panola County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Panola
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45154
(Federal)
al.

County of Pearl
Pearl River County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
River
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.9-op-45548
(Federal)
al.

Perry County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Perry
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45778
(Federal)
al.

Prentiss County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Prentiss
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45723
(Federal)
al.

MS
County of Scott
Scott County, Mississippi v. Teva
1:20-op-45238
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
Stone County, Mississippi v.

MS
County of Stone
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45775 /
N.D. Ohio
al. /Stone County, Mississippi v.
1:20-op-45168
(Federal)
McKesson Corporation, et al.

C-170

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MS
County of
Sunflower County, Mississippi v Purdue
1:18-op-45020
N.D. Ohio
Sunflower
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
County of
Tallahatchie County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
Tallahatchie
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45399
(Federal)
Tate County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Tate
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45153
(Federal)
al.

Tippah County, Mississippi, v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Tippah
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45118
(Federal)
al.

MS
County of
Tishomingo County, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:20-op-45039
N.D. Ohio
Tishomingo
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MS
County of Tunica
Tunica County, Mississippi v. Teva
1:20-op-45213
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
Union County, Mississippi, v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Union
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45120
(Federal)
al.

Walthall County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
County of Walthall
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45411
(Federal)
al.

MS
County of
Washington County, Mississippi v.
1: 1 8-op-45022
N.D. Ohio
Washington
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MS
County of Wayne
Wayne County, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:19-op-45877
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
County of
Yalobusha County, Mississippi v.

N.D. Ohio
MS
Yalobusha
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45152
(Federal)
MS
Greenwood LeFlore
Greenwood LeFlore Hospital v.
1:1.8-op-45551
N.D. Ohio
Hospital
McKesson Corporation, et al.

Federal
Monroe County
Southwest Mississippi Regional Medical
Healthcare
Center; Infirmary Health Hospitals, Inc.;
MS
Authority d/b/a
Monroe County Healthcare Authority
1:17-op-45175
N.D. Ohio
Monroe County
d/b/a Monroe County Hospital v.
(Federal)
Hospital
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.

Pearl River County
pearl River County Hospital & Nursing
N.D. Ohio
MS
Hospital & Nursing
Home v. McKesson Corporation, et al.
1:19-op-45659
(Federal)
Home
Sharkey-Issaquena
Sharkey-Issaquena Community Hospital
N.D. Ohio
MS
Community
v. McKesson Corporation, et al.
1:18-op-45765
(Federal)
Hospital
Mississippi Baptist Medical Center Inc.;
Baptist Medical Center- Attala, LLC;
Baptist Medical Center -Yazoo, Inc.;
Baptist Medical Center-Leake, Inc.;
-Circuit
South Sunflower
Baptist Memorial Hospital- Calhoun,
25CI120-cv-
Court of
Co
MS
County Hospital
Inc.; Baptist Memorial Hospital -North
00291
Hinds County
Mississippi, Inc.; Baptist Memorial
(State)
Hospital -Golden Triangle, Inc.; Baptist
Memorial Hospital -Union County, Inc.;
Baptist Memorial Hospital -Booneville,
Inc.; Quitman County Hospital, LLC; and
C-171

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
South Sunflower County Hospital v.

Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC, et al.

Southwest Mississippi Regional Medical
Southwest
Center; Infirmary Health Hospitals, Inc.;
MS
Mississippi
Monroe County Healthcare Authority
1: 1 7-op-45175
N.D. Ohio
Regional Medical
d/b/a Monroe County Hospital v.
(Federal)
Center
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.

MS
Town of Arcola
Town ofArcola v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45419
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
MS
Town of Caledonia
Town of Caledonia v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45057
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.

Federal
MS
Town of Leakesville
Town ofLeakesville, Mississippi v. Teva
1:21-op-45008
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MS
Town of McLain
Town ofMcLain, Mississippi v. Teva
1:21-op-45009
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
Town of Shubuta, Mississippi v. Teva
MS
Town of Shubuta
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al. /Town
1:20-op-45283 /
N.D. Ohio
of Shubuta, Mississippi v. Teva
1:21-op-45007
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

MS
Town of Summit
Town ofSummit, Mississippi v. Purdue
1:19-op-45418
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
City of Great Falls, County of Anaconda-
N.D. Ohio
MT
City of Great Falls
Deer Lodge, County of Lake and City of
1:19-op-45083
(Federal)
Missoula v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

City of Great Falls, County of Anaconda-
N.D. Ohio
MT
City of Missoula
Deer Lodge, County of Lake and City of
1:19-op-45083
(Federal)
Missoula v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

County of
City of Great Falls, County of Anaconda-
N.D. Ohio
MT
Anaconda -Deer
Deer Lodge, County of Lake and City of
1:19-op-45083
(Federal)
Lode
Missoula v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

MT
County of Cascade
County of Cascade v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45033
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
City of Great Falls, County of Anaconda-
N.D. Ohio
MT
County of Lake
Deer Lodge, County of Lake and City of
1:19-op-45083
(Federal)
Missoula v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

MT
County of Missoula
Missoula County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45112
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
NC
City of Canton
City of Canton, Chatham County, North
1:1.9-op-45462
N.D. Ohio
Carolina v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
NC
City of Fayetteville
City of Fayetteville v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45726
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
City of Greensboro
City of Greensboro v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45289
N.D. Ohio
DrugCor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
City of Henderson
City of Henderson v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-0p-45768
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
City of Hickory
City ofHickory v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46307
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
City of.Iacksonville v.

N.D. Ohio
NC
City of Jacksonville
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45115
(Federal)
al.

NC
City of Wilmington
City of Wilmington v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45684
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al
Federal
C-172

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
City of Winston-
City of Winston-Salem v.

N.D. Ohio
NC
Salem
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45658
(Federal)
NC
County of Alamance
Alamance County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45615
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
NC
County of
Alexander County v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-46205
N.D. Ohio
Alexander
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of
Alleghany County v. AmerisourceBergeny
1:18-op-46019
N.D. Ohio
Alle han
Dru Cor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Anson
Anson County v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-46364
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Ashe
Ashe County v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1:18-op-46185
N.D. Ohio
County
Cor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Beaufort
Beaufort County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45261
N.D. Ohio
Dr u Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Bertie
Bertie County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45759
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
NC
County of Bladen
Bladen County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45557
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of
Brunswick County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45222
N.D. Ohio
Brunswick
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of
Buncombe County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:17-op-45153
N.D. Ohio
Buncombe
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Burke
Burke County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45184
N.D. Ohio
Dru Cor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Cabarrus
Cabarrus County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 1 8-op-45747
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
NC
County of Caldwell
Caldwell County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:1.8-op-45263
N.D. Ohio
DrugCor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Camden
Camden County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45001
N.D. Ohio
DrugCor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Carteret
Carteret County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45587
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Caswell
Caswell County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45875
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
Catawba County, North Carolina, v.

N.D. Ohio
NC
County of Catawba
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45145
(Federal)
al.

NC
County of Chatham
City of Canton, Chatham County, North
1:19-op-45462
N.D. Ohio
Carolina v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
NC
County of Cherokee
Cherokee County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45979
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
NC
County of Chowan
Chowan County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46175
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Cleveland
Cleveland County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45304
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
NC
County of
Columbus County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45847
N.D. Ohio
Columbus
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Craven
Craven County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45660
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
County of
Cumberland County v.

N.D. Ohio
NC
Cumberland
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-46031
(Federal)
al
C-173

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
NC
County of Currituck
Currituck County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46174
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Dare
Dare County v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1:18-op-45683
N.D. Ohio
Cor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Davidson
Davidson County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 1 8-op-46330
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
NC
County of Davie
Davie County v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-46207
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Duplin
Duplin County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45040
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Durham
Durham County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45346
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Forsyth
Forsyth County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45605
N.D. Ohio
Dru Cor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Franklin
Franklin County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46216
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Gaston
Gaston County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45166
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Granville
Granville County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45342
N.D. Ohio
Dr u Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Greene
Greene County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45584
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Guilford
Guilford County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45340
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Halifax
Halifax County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45376
N.D. Ohio
Dru Cor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Haywood
Haywood County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45014
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Iredell
Iredell County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:1.8-op-45774
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
NC
County of Jones
Tones County v. AmerisourceBergen1:19-op-45142 Drug
N.D. Ohio
Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Lee
Lee County v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1:19-op-45290
N.D. Ohio
Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Lenoir
Lenoir County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45991
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Lincoln
Lincoln County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45719
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
NC
County of Madison
Madison County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46067
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
NC
County of Martin
Martin County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45522
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
NC
County of
McDowell County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45524
N.D. Ohio
McDowell
DrugCorporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of
Mecklenburg County v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45221
N.D. Ohio
Mecklenburg
L.P., et al.

Federal
NC
County of Mitchell
Mitchell County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45550
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Moore
Moore County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46028
N.D. Ohio
DrugCor oration, et al.

Federal
County of New
New Hanover County v.

N.D. Ohio
NC
Hanover
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45006
(Federal)
C-174

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
NC
County of Onslow
Onslow County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45114
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Orange
Orange County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45308
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Pamlico
Pamlico County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45049
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.

Federal
County of
Pasquotank County v.

N.D. Ohio
NC
Pasquotank
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45986
(Federal)
NC
County of Person
Person County v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45276
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Pitt
Pitt County v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1: 1 8-op-45208
N.D. Ohio
Cor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Polk
Polk County v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1:18-op-45900
N.D. Ohio
Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Randolph
Randolph County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45275
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
County of
Richmond County, North Carolina v.

N.D. Ohio
NC
Richmond
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45586
al.(Federal)
NC
County of Robeson
Robeson County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-46141
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
County of
Rockingham County v.

N.D. Ohio
NC
Rockingham
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45015
(Federal)
NC
County of Rowan
Rowan County v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45799
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of
Rutherford County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:1.8-op-45243
N.D. Ohio
Rutherford
DrugCorporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Sampson
Sampson County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45583
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Scotland
Scotland County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45336
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Stokes
Stokes County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45185
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
(Federal)
NC
County of Surry
Surry County v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1:18-op-45086
N.D. Ohio
Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
NC
County of Tyrrell
Tyrrell County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45725
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
NC
County of Vance
Vance County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45759
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
NC
County of Warren
Warren County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45536
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
County of
Washington County v.

N.D. Ohio
NC
Washington
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45002
(Federal)
NC
County of Watauga
Watauga County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45525
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Wayne
Wayne County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45585
N.D. Ohio
DrugCor oration, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Wilkes
Wilkes County v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45239
N.D. Ohio
DrugCor oration, et al.

Federal
C-175

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
NC
County of Yadkin
Yadkin County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45014
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.

Federal
NC
County of Yancey
Yancey County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46071
N.D. Ohio
Dru Corporation, et al.

Federal
ND
City of Bismarck
City of Bismarck v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45629
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
ND
City of Devils Lake
City of Devils Lake v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45637
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
ND
City of Fargo
The City of Fargo v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45675
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
Cass County, North Dakota and City of
N.D. Ohio
ND
City of Grand Forks
Grand Forks, North Dakota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45276
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.

ND
City of Lisbon
City of Lisbon v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45761
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Barnes
Barnes County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45640
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Benson
Benson County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45643
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Burleigh
Burleigh County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45630
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
Cass County, North Dakota and City of
N.D. Ohio
ND
County of Cass
Grand Forks, North Dakota v. Purdue
1:19-op-45276
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.

ND
County of Dickey
Dickey County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45919
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Dunn
Dunn County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45631
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Eddy
Eddy County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:1.9-op-45917
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Foster
Foster County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45918
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Grand
Grand Forks County v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45647
N.D. Ohio
Forks
L.P., et al.

Federal
ND
County of LaMoure
LaMoure County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45760
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
ND
County of
McKenzie County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-46134
N.D. Ohio
McKenzie
et al.
(Federal)
ND
County of McLean
McLean County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45632
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
ND
County of Mercer
Mercer County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45635
N.D. Ohio
al.
(Federal)
ND
County of Mountrail
Mountrail County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45634
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
ND
County of Pembina
Pembina County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45674
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
ND
County of Pierce
fierce County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45683
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Ramsey
Ramsey County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45641
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Ransom
Ransom County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 1 9-op-45645
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
C-176

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
ND
County of Richland
Richland County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45644
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
ND
County of Rolette
Rolette County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45646
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Sargent
Sargent County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45642
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Stark
Stark County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45763
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Towner
Towner County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45639
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Walsh
Walsh County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45638
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Ward
Ward County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45762
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Wells
Wells County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45682
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
ND
County of Williams
Williams County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45633
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
City of South Sioux
City of South Sioux City, Nebraska v.

N.D. Ohio
NE
City
AmerisoureeBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45553
(Federal)
al.

NE
County of Douglas
County of Douglas v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45068
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
NE
County of Keith
Keith County, Nebraska v. Purdue
1:19-op-45263
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
NE
County of Knox
County of Knox, State ofNebraska v.
1: 1 8-op-45555
N.D. Ohio
McKesson Corporation, et al.

Federal
NE
County of Lincoln
Lincoln County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:1.9-op-45099
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
Sarpy County, Nebraska v.

N.D. Ohio
NE
County of Sarpy
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46038
(Federal)
al.

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Board of Education
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
of Kearsarge
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Regional School
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
N.D. Ohio
NH
Unit - School
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
Administrative Unit
Public Schools, Martin County Public
65 Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
(`RSU) 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57 Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
C-178

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
55, Maine Sad6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
Board of Education
County Public Schools, Bangor School
N.D. Ohio
NH
of Lebanon School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
District
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pitts reld School District, Tamworth
C-179

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Board of Education
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
NH
of Pittsfield School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
District
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
(Federal)
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Board of Education
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
N.D. Ohio
NH
of Tamworth School
School District, Mason County Public
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
District
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
C-180

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD) H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

NH
City of Belmont
City of Belmont v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:1.9-op-45707
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
NH
City of Berlin
Berlin, New Hampshire v. Purdue
1:18-op-46040
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
NH
City of Claremont
City of Claremont v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45690
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
City of Concord, New Hampshire and
N.D. Ohio
NH
City of Concord
City of Dover New Hampshire v. Purdue
1:18-op-45573
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.

City of Concord, New Hampshire and
N.D. Ohio
NH
City of Dover
City of Dover New Hampshire v. Purdue
1:18-op-45573
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.

City of Franklin, New Hampshire v.

N.D. Ohio
NH
City of Franklin
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45728
(Federal)
al.

C-181

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
NH
City of Keene
The City of Keene v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45511
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
City ofLaconia, New Hampshire v.

N.D. Ohio
NH
City of Laconia
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45583
(Federal)
al.

NH
City of Manchester
City of Manchester v. Purdue Pharma
1: 1 7-op-45163
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
NH
City of Nashua
The City of Nashua v. Purdue Pharma
1: 1 8-op-45062
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
City of Rochester, NH and County of
N.D. Ohio
NH
City of Rochester
Merrimack, NH v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 1 8-op-46106
(Federal)
et al.

NH
County of Belknap
Belknap County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45705
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
NH
County of Carroll
Carroll County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:19-op-46137
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
NH
County of Cheshire
Cheshire County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45706
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
NH
County of Coos
Coos County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:19-op-46136
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
NH
County of Grafton
Grafton County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45691
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
NH
County of
Hillsborough County, New Hampshire v.
1:18-op-46353
N.D. Ohio
Hillsborough
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
County of
City of Rochester, NH and County of
N.D. Ohio
NH
Merrimack
Merrimack, NH v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-46106
(Federal)
et al.

NH
County of
Rockingham County v. Purdue Pharma
1:1.9-op-45703
N.D. Ohio
Rockingham
L.P., et al.

Federal
NH
County of Strafford
Strafford County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45689
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
NH
County of Sullivan
Sullivan County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45704
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
Town ofDerry, New Hampshire v.

N.D. Ohio
NH
Town of Derry
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45582
(Federal)
al.

Town of
Town of Londonderry, New Hampshire v.

N.D. Ohio
NH
Londonderry
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45727
(Federal)
NJ
Borough of Paramus
Borough of Paramus, New Jersey v. Teva
1:19-op-46046
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
NJ
Borough of
The Borough of Ridgefield v. Purdue
1:18-op-46117
N.D. Ohio
Ridgefield
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
NJ
City of Bayonne
City of Bayonne, New Jersey v. Teva
1:19-op-46044
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
NJ
City of Clifton
City of Clifton, New Jersey v. Teva
1:19-op-46076
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
NJ
City of Elizabeth
City of Elizabeth, New Jersey v. Teva
1:19-op-46045
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
NJ
City of Newark
The City of Newark, New Jersey v. Purdue
1:18-op-45761
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
NJ
City of Paterson
City of Paterson v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 1 8-op-45371
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
C-182

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
NJ
City of Trenton
City of Trenton v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-46158
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
NJ - Superior
NJ
City of Vineland
City of Vineland v. Teva Pharmaceutical
CUM-L-000422-
Court of
Cumberland
Industries Ltd., et al.
22 County
State
NJ
County of Atlantic
Atlantic County, New Jersey v. Teva
1:19-op-46071
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
NJ
County of
County of Burlington, New Jersey v.
1:19-op-45928
N.D. Ohio
Burlington
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
NJ
County of
Cumberland County v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-46016
N.D. Ohio
Cumberland
L.P., et al.

Federal
NJ
County of Hudson
County of Hudson, New Jersey v. Purdue
1:18-op-45937
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
NJ
County of
Monmouth County v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-46118
N.D. Ohio
Monmouth
L.P., et al.

Federal
NJ
County of Ocean
County of Ocean, New Jersey v. Purdue
1:19-op-46157
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
NJ
County of Union
Union County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45374
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
NJ
Town of Clinton
Town of Clinton, New Jersey v. Teva
1:19-op-46085
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
NJ
Township of
Township of Barnegat v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45925
N.D. Ohio
Barne at
L.P., et al.

Federal
NJ
Township of
The Township of Bloomfield, New Jersey
1: 1 8-op-45053
N.D. Ohio
Bloomfield
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
NJ
Township of Brick
Township of Brick, New Jersey v. Purdue
1:1.9-op-45924
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
NJ
Township of
Township of Irvington v. Purdue Pharma
1:17-op-45156
N.D. Ohio
Irvington
L.P., et al.

Federal
NJ
Township of Saddle
Township of Saddle Brook, New Jersey v.
1:19-op-45431
N.D. Ohio
Brook
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
NM
City of Alamogordo
City of Alamogordo, New Mexico v. Teva
1:19-op-46067
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
NM
City of Espanola
City of Espanola, New Mexico v. Teva
1:19-op-46142
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
NM
City of Hobbs
City of Hobbs, New Mexico v. Teva
1:19-op-46068
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
NM
City of Las Cruces
City ofLas Cruces v. AmerisourceBergen
1:21-op-45059
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal)
NM - County
NM
City of Santa Fe
City of Santa Fe v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
D-101-CV-2019-
of Santa Fe,
1 st Judicial
et al.
01809
District
State
County of Bernalillo
Board of County Commissioners of the
NM
(Board of County
County of Bernalillo, New Mexico v.
1:19-op-45301
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.

NM
County of Catron
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners of the
1:19-op-45320
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County of Catron, New Mexico v.
(Federal)
C-183

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.

County of Cibola
Board of County Commissioners of the
NM
(Board of County
County of Cibola, New Mexico v.
1:19-op-45321
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.

County of Colfax
Board of County Commissioners of The
N.D. Ohio
NM
(Board of County
County of Colfax v. Allergan plc, et al.
1:21-op-45055
(Federal)
Commissioners
County of Curry
Board of County Commissioners of the
NM
(Board of County
County of Curry, New Mexico v.
1:19-op-45347
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.

County of Dona
Board of County Commissioners of the
NM
Ana (Board of
County of Dona Ana, New Mexico v.
1:18-op-46206
N.D. Ohio
County
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation et
(Federal)
Commissioners)
al.

NM
County of Eddy
County of Eddy v. Allergan plc, et al.
1:22-op-45015
N.D. Ohio
Federal
NM
County of Grant
Grant County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45108
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
County of Hidalgo
Board Of County Commissioners of The
N.D. Ohio
NM
(Board of County
County of Hidalgo, New Mexico v. Teva
1:19-op-46069
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

County of Lea
Board of County Commissioners of the
N.D. Ohio
NM
(Board of County
County of Lea v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45266
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Lincoln
Board of County Commissioners of the
NM
(Board of County
County of Lincoln, New Mexico v.
1:19-op-45513
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.

NM
County of Luna
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners of the
1:21-op-45056
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County of Luna v. Allergan plc, et al.
(Federal)
County of McKinley
Board of County Commissioners of the
NM
(Board of County
County of McKinley, New Mexico v.
1:1.9-op-45033
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.

NM
County of Mora
County ofMora v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45080
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
County of Otero
Board of County Commissioners of the
N.D. Ohio
NM
(Board of County
County of Otero v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45216
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

NM
County of Rio
The County of Rio Arriba v. Purdue
1:19-op-45054
N.D. Ohio
Arriba
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
NM
County of Roosevelt
The County of Roosevelt v. Purdue
1:18-op-46343
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
NM
County of San Juan
San Juan County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45829
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
County of San
Board of County Commissioners for San
NM
Miguel (Board of
Miguel County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45354
N.D. Ohio
County
al
(Federal)
Commissioners
C-184

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
NM
County of Sandoval
Sandoval County, New Mexico v. Purdue
1:19-op-45421
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
County of Santa Fe
Board of County Commissioners of the
N.D. Ohio
NM
(Board of County
County of Santa Fe v. Purdue Pharma
1: 1 8-op-45776
(Federal)
Commissioners)
L.P., et al.

County of Sierra
Board of County Commissioners of the
NM
(Board of County
County of Sierra, New Mexico v.
1:19-op-45322
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.

County of Socorro
Board of County Commissioners of
NM
(Board of County
Socorro, New Mexico v.
1:19-op-45323
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.

County of Taos
Board of County Commissioners of the
N.D. Ohio
NM
(Board of County
County of Taos v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45051
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Torrance
Board of County Commissioners of the
N.D. Ohio
NM
(Board of County
County of Torrance v. Allergan plc, et al.
1:22-op-45004
(Federal)
Commissioners
NM
County of Union
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners of the
1:21-op-45057
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County of Union v. Allergan plc, et al.
(Federal)
County of Valencia
Board of County Commissioners of the
NM
(Board of County
County of Valencia, New Mexico v.
1:19-op-45324
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.

NV-3rd
Central Lyon
Lyon County, The North Lyon County
Judicial
NV
County Fire
Fire Protection District and the Central
20-CV-00795
District
Protection District
Lyon County Fire Protection District v.

Court, Lyon
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

County
(State)
NV
City of Boulder
Boulder City v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45648
N.D. Ohio
al.
(Federal)
NV - 1st
Judicial
NV
City of Carson
Carson City v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
20 TRT
District
USA, Inc., et al.
000471B
Court, Carson
City County
State
NV - 7th
Judicial
NV
City of Ely
City of Ely v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
CV2007077
District
Inc., et al.

Court, White
Pine County
State
NV - 3rd
Judicial
NV
City of Fernley
The City of Fernley v. Teva
20-CV-00796
District
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Court, Lyon
County
State
C-185

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
NV - 8th
Judicial
NV
City of Henderson
City of Henderson v. Purdue Pharma
A-19-800695-B
District
L.P., et al.

Court, Clark
County
State
NV - 8th
Judicial
NV
City of Las Vegas
City of Las Vegas v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
A-19-800697-B
District
et al.

Court, Clark
County
(State)
NV
City of Mesquite
City of Mesquite v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45649
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
NV - 8th
Judicial
NV
City of North Las
City of North Las Vegas v. Purdue
A-19-800699-B
District
Vegas
Pharma L.P., et al.

Court, Clark
County
State
NV - 2nd
Judicial
NV
City of Sparks
City of Sparks v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
CV20-01152
District
Court,
USA, Inc., et al.

Washoe
County
State
NV - 4th
Judicial
NV
City of West
City of West Wendover v. Teva
DC-CV-20-70
District
Wendover
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Court, Elko
County
State
NV - 10th
Judicial
NV
County of Churchill
Churchill County v. Teva
20-100C-0805
District
Court,
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Churchill
County
(State)
NV
County of Clark
Clark County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-46168
N.D. Ohio
al.
(Federal)
NV - 9th
Judicial
NV
County of Douglas
Douglas County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
2020 CV 00139
District
Court,
USA, Inc., et al.

Douglas
County
State
NV - 5th.

NV
County of
Esmeralda County v. Teva
CV20-5117
Judicial
Esmeralda
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

District
Court,
C-186

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Esmeralda
County
State
NV - 6th
Judicial
Humboldt County v. Teva
District
NV
County of Humboldt
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

CV2022306
Court,
Humboldt
County
(State)
NV - 7th
Judicial
NV
County of Lincoln
Lincoln County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
CV0702620
District
Court,
USA, Inc., et al.

Lincoln
County
State
NV - 3rd
Lyon County, The North Lyon County
Judicial
NV
County of Lyon
Fire Protection District and the Central
20-CV-00795
District
Lyon County Fire Protection District v.

Court, Lyon
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

County
State
NV -llth
Judicial
NV
County of Mineral
Mineral County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
21CV-TT12-
District
Court,
USA, Inc., et al.
2020-0104
Mineral
County
State
Nye County, Nevada v.

N.D. Ohio
NV
County of Nye
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46238
(Federal)
al.

NV - 2nd
Judicial
NV
County of Washoe
Washoe County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
CV20-01142
District
Court,
USA, Inc., et al.

Washoe
County
(State)
NV - 7th
Judicial
NV
County of White
White Pine County v. Teva
CV2007076
District
Pine
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Court, White
Pine County
State
NV - 3rd
North Lyon County
Lyon County, The North Lyon County
Judicial
NV
Fire Protection
Fire Protection District and the Central
20-CV-00795
District
District
Lyon County Fire Protection District v.

Court, Lyon
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

County
State
C-187

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Board of Education
Board of Education of Boardman Local
OH
of Boardman Local
Schools and Board of Education of
1:22-op-45023-
N.D. Ohio
Schools
Liberty Local Schools v. Cephalon, Inc.,
DAP
(Federal)
et al.

Board of Education
Board of Education of Boardman Local
OH
of Liberty Local
Schools and Board of Education of
1:22-op-45023-
N.D. Ohio
Schools
Liberty Local Schools v. Cephalon, Inc.,
DAP
(Federal)
et al.

City ofAshland, Ohio v.

N.D. Ohio
OH
City of Ashland
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-46203
(Federal)
al.

The County ofPortage, Ohio; and City of
Ravenna, Ohio and City ofKent, Ohio
and City ofAurora, Ohio, And The State
City of Aurora (Law
of Ohio ex rel. Prosecuting Attorney of
OH
Director Dean E.

Portage County, Victor V. Vigluicci;
1:18-op-45993
N.D. Ohio
DePiero)
Frank Cimino, Law Director, City of
(Federal)
Ravenna, Ohio; Hope L. Jones, Law
Director, City of Kent, Ohio; and Dean E.

Depiero, Law Director, City of Aurora,
Ohio v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City ofNorton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village of Richfield;
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller, The Director of
N.D. Ohio
OH
City of Barberton
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
1:18-op-45767
(Federal)
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richf eld,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OH
City of Broadview
The City of Broadview Heights v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45330
N.D. Ohio
Heights
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
OH
City of Brunswick
The City of Brunswick; Ohio v. Purdue
1:18-op-45199
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
City of Cincinnati, Ohio v.

N.D. Ohio
OH
City of Cincinnati
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:17-op-45041
(Federal)
al.

OH
City of Cleveland
City of Cleveland v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45132
N.D. Ohio
Dru Cor oration, et al.

Federal
OH
City of Columbus
The City of Columbus v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-0p-45048
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village of Richfield;
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
OH
City of Cuyahoga
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
1:18-op-45767
N.D. Ohio
Falls
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
(Federal)
of Barberton, Lisa Miller, The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director or The Ciiy
C-189

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
of Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village of Boston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford, The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director, for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richfield,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OH
City of Dayton
City of Dayton, Ohio v. Purdue Pharma
1: 1 7-op-45032
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
City of East
City of East Cleveland v.

N.D. Ohio
OH
Cleveland
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45448
(Federal)
OH
City of Elyria
The City of Elyria v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45080
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
OH
City of Euclid
The City of Euclid v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-46013
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
City of Fairfield, Ohio v.

N.D. Ohio
OH
City of Fairfield
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45742
(Federal)
al.

The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village of Richfield,•
OH
City of Fairlawn
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
1:18-op-45767
N.D. Ohio
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
(Federal)
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller; The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Noce, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
C-190

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
The Law Director, for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
of Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village of Boston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richfield,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OH
City of Findlay
The City of Findlay v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-46339
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
OH
City of Fostoria
City of Fostoria v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 1 8-op-45433
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
OH
City of Garfield
The City of Garfield Heights v. Purdue
1:1.8-op-45999
N.D. Ohio
Heights
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village ofMogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village of Richfield;
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
N.D. Ohio
OH
City of Green
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
1:18-op-45767
(Federal)
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller, The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director or The City o
C-191

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
of Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village of Boston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director, for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richfield,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

City of Hamilton, Ohio v.

N.D. Ohio
OH
City of Hamilton
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46024
(Federal)
al.

OH
City of Huron
City of Huron v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45431
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
City of Ironton, Ohio v.

N.D. Ohio
OH
City of Ironton
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.8-op-46025
(Federal)
al.

The County ofPortage, Ohio; and City of
Ravenna, Ohio and City of Kent, Ohio
and City ofAurora, Ohio, And The State
City of Kent (Law
of Ohio ex rel. Prosecuting Attorney of
OH
Director Hope L.

Portage County, Victor V. Vigluicci;
1:18-op-45993
N.D. Ohio
Jones)
Frank Cimino, Law Director, City of
(Federal)
Ravenna, Ohio; Hope L. Jones, Law
Director, City of Kent, Ohio; and Dean E.

Depiero, Law Director, City of Aurora,
Ohio v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OH
City of Lakewood
City of Lakewood, Ohio v. Purdue
1:18-op-45240
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
The City of Lebanon, Ohio v.

N.D. Ohio
OH
City of Lebanon
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45163
(Federal)
al.

OH
City of Lima
City of Lima v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1:18-op-45333
N.D. Ohio
Corporation, et al.

Federal
OH
City of Lorain
City of Lorain, Ohio v. Purdue Pharma
1:17-op-45000
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
OH
City of Lyndhurst
City of Lyndhurst v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45636
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
C-192

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
OH
City of Macedonia
City of Macedonia v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45447
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.

Federal
OH
City of Mansfield
City ofMansfeld v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45380
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
OH
City of Marietta
Washington County and City of Marietta,
1:19-op-45230
N.D. Ohio
Ohio v. Cardinal Health, Inc., et al.

Federal
City of Mayfield
City of Mayfield Heights v.

N.D. Ohio
OH
Heights
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45635
(Federal)
OH
City of Middletown
City of Middletown, Ohio v. Teva
1:19-op-46133
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village of Richfield;
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of'Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
City of Munroe
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
N.D. Ohio
OH
Falls
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
1: 1 8-op-45767
(Federal)
The Law Director for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
of Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village of Boston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford, The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richfield,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
C-193

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village of Richf eld;
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller, The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
City of New
The Law Director for The City of
N.D. Ohio
OH
Franklin
Mogadore, Marshal M.Pitchford, The
1: 1 8-op-45767
(Federal)
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
of Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village ofBoston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford, The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richf eld,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OH
City of North
The City of North Olmsted v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-46012
N.D. Ohio
Olmsted
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
C-194

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
OH
City of North
The City of North Ridgeville v. Purdue
1:18-op-46015
N.D. Ohio
Ridgeville
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
City of North
City of North Royalton v.

N.D. Ohio
OH
Royalton
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45427
(Federal)
The City of Barberton; The Village of.

Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village of Richf eld;
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller, The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director for The City of
N.D. Ohio
OH
City of Norton
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
1:18-op-45767
(Federal)
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
of Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village ofBoston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford, The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richfield,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OH
City of Norwalk
City of Norwalk v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-46351
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
C-195

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
OH
City of Olmsted
The City of Olmsted Falls v. Purdue
1:18-op-46014
N.D. Ohio
Falls
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
OH
City of Parma
City of Parma v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:17-op-45001
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
OH
City of Parana
The City of Parma Heights v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45773
N.D. Ohio
Heights
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
OH
City of Portsmouth
City of Portsmouth v. AmerisourceBergen
1:17-op-45042
N.D. Ohio
Dru Corporation et al.

Federal
The County ofPortage, Ohio; and City of
Ravenna, Ohio and City of Kent, Ohio
and City ofAurora, Ohio, And The State
City of Ravenna
of Ohio ex rel. Prosecuting Attorney of
OH
(Law Director Frank
Portage County, Victor V. Vigluicci;
1:18-op-45993
N.D. Ohio
J. Cimino)
Frank Cimino, Law Director, City of
(Federal)
Ravenna, Ohio; Hope L. Jones, Law
Director, City of Kent, Ohio; and Dean E.

Depiero, Law Director, City ofAurora,
Ohio v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OH
City of Sandusky
City of Sandusky v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 1 8-op-45788
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
OH
City of Seven Hills
City of Seven Hills, Ohio v. Purdue
1:19-op-45413
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
OH
City of St. Marys
City of St. Marys v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45638
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.

Federal
The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village of Richfield;
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
N.D. Ohio
OH
City of Stow
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
1:18-op-45767
(Federal)
of Barberton, Lisa Miller, The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
o Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
C-196

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village of Boston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford, The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor, for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richf eld,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OH
City of Strongsville
The City of Strongsville v. Purdue
] A 8-op-46111
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village of Richfield;
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller, The Director of
OH
City of Tallmadge
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
1:18-op-45767
N.D. Ohio
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
(Federal)
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director, for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richfield,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OH
City of Toledo
The City of Toledo v. Purdue Pharma
1:17-op-45005
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
OH
City of Van Wert
City of Van Wert v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-46345
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.

Federal
OH
City of Warren
The City of Warren v. Purdue Pharma
1: 1 8-op-45434
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al
Federal
OH
City of Warrensville
Warrensville Heights, Ohio v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-46299
N.D. Ohio
Heights
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
OH
City of Wickliffe
City of Wickliffe v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45637
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.

Federal
OH
City of Youngstown
City of Youngstown, Ohio v. Purdue
1:19-op-45722
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
County of Adams
Adams County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45042
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Allen
Allen County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45401
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Ashland
Ashland County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45012
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation et al.

OH
County of Ashtabula
The County of Ashtabula v. Purdue
1:1.8-op-45050
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
County of Athens
Athens County Board of Commissioners v.

N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45326
(Federal)
Commissioners)
al.

County of Auglaize
Auglaize County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45570
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Belmont
Belmont County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:17-op-45034
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Brown
Brown County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:17-op-45035
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Butler
Butler County Board of Commissioners v.

N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:18-op-45037
(Federal)
Commissioners
C-198

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
County of Carroll
Carroll County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46079
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Cor oration, et al.

County of
Champaign (Board
Champaign County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45065
(Federal)
Commissioners)Drug
Corporation, et al.

County of Clermont
Clermont County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 7-op-45033
(Federal)
Commissioners
DrugCorporation, et al.

County of Clinton
Clinton County Board of Commissioners
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:18-op-45060
(Federal)
Commissioners)
County of
Columbiana (Board
Columbiana County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45289
(Federal)
Commissioners)C
Drug orporation, et al.

County of
Coshocton (Board
Coshocton County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45027
(Federal)
Commissioners)Drug
Corporation et al.

County of Crawford
Crawford County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45288
(Federal)
Commissioners
Dru Cor oration, et al.

County of Darke
Darke County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45046
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Delaware
Delaware County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45266
(Federal)
Commissioners
DrugCorporation, et al.

County of Erie
Erie County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45291
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Fairfield
Fairfield County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45038
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Franklin
Franklin County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45162
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation et al.

County of Fulton
Board of Commissioners of Fulton
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
County, Ohio v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45440
(Federal)
Commissioners)
al.

County of Gallia
Gallia County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:17-op-45043
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Geauga
Geauga County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45256
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Guernsey
Guernsey County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45044
(Federal)
Commissioners
DrugCorporation, et al.

C-199

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
County of Hamilton
Hamilton County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45272
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Hancock
Hancock County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45572
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Harrison
Harrison County Board of Commissioners
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:18-op-45547
(Federal)
Commissioners
County of Hocking
Hocking County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 7-op-45044
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Huron
Huron County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45292
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Jackson
Jackson County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:17-op-45037
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

OH
County of Jefferson
The County of Jefferson v. Purdue
1:18-op-45365
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
County of Knox
Knox County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45665
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Cor oration, et al.

OH
County of Lake
The County of Lake v. Purdue Pharma
1: 1 8-op-45032
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
County of Lawrence
Lawrence County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:17-op-45045
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Cor oration, et al.

County of Licking
Licking County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45041
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Logan
Logan County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45047
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

OH
County of Lorain
The County of Lorain, v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45078
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Board of Commissioners of Lucas County,
County of Lucas
Ohio, Mental Health & Recovery Services
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Board ofLucas County, and Lucas
1:1.8-op-46177
(Federal)
Commissioners)
County Children Services Board of
Trustees v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

County of Marion
Marion County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45529
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Medina
County of Medina, Ohio and The State of
OH
(Prosecuting
Ohio ex rel. Prosecuting Attorney of
1:19-op-45839
N.D. Ohio
Attorney S. Forrest
Medina County, S. Forrest Thompson v.
(Federal)
Thompson)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OH
County of Meigs
Meigs County, Ohio v. Cardinal Health,
1:19-op-45229
N.D. Ohio
Inc., et al.

Federal
County of Mercer
Mercer County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners, v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46094
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

C-200

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
County of Miami
Board of Miami County Commissioners,
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
on behalf of Miami County, Ohio v.
1:19-op-45335
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

County of Monroe
Monroe County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45597
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of
Montgomery (Board
Montgomery County Board of County
OH
of County
Commissioners and
Commissioners and State of Ohio ex rel.
1: 1 8-op-46080
N.D. Ohio
Prosecuting
Mathias IT Heck, Jr., Prosecuting
(Federal)
Attorney Mathias H.

Attorney v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Heck, Jr.

OH
County of Morrow
(Board of County
Morrow County Board of Commissioners
1:18-op-45059
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of
Muskingum (Board
Muskingum County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
of County
Commissioners, v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45137
(Federal)
Commissioners)Drug
Corporation, et al.

County of Noble
Noble County, Ohio by the Noble County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. Cardinal Health, Inc.,
1:19-op-45096
(Federal)
Commissioners)
et al.

County of Ottawa
Ottawa County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45031
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Perry
Perry County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45245
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Pike
Pike County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:17-op-45039
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

The County of Portage, Ohio; and City of
Ravenna, Ohio and City ofKent, Ohio
County of Portage
and City ofAurora, Ohio, And The State
(Board of County
of Ohio ex rel. Prosecuting Attorney of
OH
Commissioners and
Portage County, Victor V. Vigluicci;
1:18-op-45993
.

N.D. Ohio
County Prosecutor
Frank J. Cimino, Law Director, City of
(Federal)
Victor Vigluicci)
Ravenna, Ohio; Hope L. Jones, Law
Director, City of Kent, Ohio; and Dean E.

Depiero, Law Director, City ofAurora,
Ohio v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

County of Ross
Ross County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:17-op-45040
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Sandusky
Sandusky County Board of
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45254
(Federal)
Commissioners)
al.

County of Scioto
Scioto County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:17-op-45038
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

C-201

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
County of Seneca
Seneca County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45290
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Shelby
Shelby County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45668
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Stark
Stark County, Ohio Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1: 1 8-op-46340
(Federal)
Commissioners)
al.

OH
County of Trumball
The County of Trumball, v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45079
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
County of
The County of Tuscarawas; The State of
OH
Tuscarawas
(Prosecuting
Ohio ex rel. Prosecuting Attorney of
1:19-op-45098
N.D. Ohio
Attorney Ryan
Tuscarawas County, Ryan Styer v. Purdue
(Federal)
St er
Pharma L.P., et al.

County of Van Wert
Van Wert County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45571
(Federal)
Commissioners)
DrM Cor oration, et al.

County of Vinton
Vinton County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 7-op-45036
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Dru Cor oration, et al.

OH
County of
Washington County and City of Marietta,
1:19-op-45230
N.D. Ohio
Washington
Ohio v. Cardinal Health, Inc., et al.

Federal
County of Wayne
Wayne County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45150
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Dru Cor oration, et al.

County of Williams
Williams County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45257
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.

County of Wyandot
Wyandot County Board of County
N.D. Ohio
OH
(Board of County
Commissioners v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46078
(Federal)
Commissioners
DrugCorporation, et al.

Board of Commissioners of Lucas County,
Lucas County
Ohio, Mental Health & Recovery Services
N.D. Ohio
OH
Children Services
Board of Lucas County, and Lucas
1:18-op-46177
(Federal)
Board of Trustees
County Children Services Board of
Trustees v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Mental Health and
Recovery Services
Mental Health & Recovery Services
N.D. Ohio
OH
Board of Allen,
Board of Allen, Auglaize and Hardin
1:18-op-46344
(Federal)
Auglaize and Hardin
Counties v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Counties
Mental Health and
Board of Commissioners of Lucas County,
Recovery Services
Ohio, Mental Health & Recovery Services
N.D. Ohio
OH
Board of Lucas
Board of Lucas County, and Lucas
1:18-op-46177
(Federal)
County
County Children Services Board of
Trustees v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OH
Richland County
Richland County Children's Services v.
1:17-op-45003
N.D. Ohio
Children's Services
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
The City of Barberton; The Village of
N.D. Ohio
OH
Township of Boston
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
1: 1 8-op-45767
(Federal)
Village (?f Clinton; Copley Township;
C-202

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village of'Richfield;
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller; The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
of Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village of Boston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford, The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director, for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richfield,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
OH
Township of Copley
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
1:18-op-45767
N.D. Ohio
The City of Green; The Village of
(Federal)
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City ofNorton; The Village
o Peninsula; The Village o Rich geld;
C-203

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller; The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director, for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
of Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village of Boston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford, The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village ofLakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richfield,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
of Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village of Boston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford, The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richf eld,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OH
Township of
The Township of Painesville v. Purdue
1:18-op-46035
N.D. Ohio
Painesville
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village of Richfield;
OH
Township of
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
1:18-op-45767
N.D. Ohio
Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
(Federal)
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller, The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
C-205

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
The Law Director, for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff,' The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
of Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village of Boston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richf eld,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village of Richf eld;
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
N.D. Ohio
OH
Valley Fire District
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
1:1.8-op-45767
(Federal)
of Barberton, Lisa Miller The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kvstoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
o Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
C-206

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village of Richfield,•
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller, The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
OH
Village of Boston
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
1:18-op-45767
N.D. Ohio
Heights
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
(Federal)
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richfield,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Village of Brooklyn
Village of Brooklyn Heights v.

N.D. Ohio
OH
Heights
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45450
(Federal)
The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village ofRichfield;
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
OH
Village of Clinton
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
1:18-op-45767
N.D. Ohio
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
(Federal)
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director, for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Riehf eld,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village of Richfield;
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller, The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director for The City of
N.D. Ohio
OH
Village of Lakemore
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
1:18-op-45767
(Federal)
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
of Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village of Boston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford, The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richfield,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

C-209

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
OH
Village of
Lexington
Village of Lexington v. Actavis LLC et al.
1:21-op-45109
N.D. Ohio
Federal
The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of'Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village ofRiehfield;
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller, The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
Village of
The Law Director for The City of
N.D. Ohio
OH
Mogadore
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
1:18-op-45767
(Federal)
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
of Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village ofBoston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford, The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director, for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richfield,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Village of
Village of Newburgh Heights v.

N.D. Ohio
OH
Newburgh Heights
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45449
(Federal)
OH
Village of Peninsula
The City of Barberton; The Village of
1: 1 8-op-45767
N.D. Ohio
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Federal
C-210

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City of Norton; The Village
of Peninsula; The Village of'Richfield;
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller The Director of
Law for The City of'Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
of Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village of Boston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford, The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director, for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director, for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richfield,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

The City of Barberton; The Village of
Boston Heights; Boston Township; The
Village of Clinton; Copley Township;
Coventry Township; The City of
N.D. Ohio
OH
Village of Richfield
Cuyahoga Falls; The City of Fairlawn;
1:18-op-45767
(Federal)
The City of Green; The Village of
Lakemore; The Village of Mogadore; The
City of Munroe Falls; The City of New
Franklin; The City o Norton; The Village
C-211

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
of Peninsula; The Village ofRiehfield;
The Village of Silver Lake; Springfield
Township; The City of Stow; The City of
Tallmadge; Summit County Public
Health; Valley Fire District; State of Ohio
Ex Rel., The Director of Law for The City
of Barberton, Lisa Miller; The Director of
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Noce, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff, The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
of Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village of Boston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford, The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village ofLakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richf eld,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Law for The City of Tallmadge, Megan
Raber; The Law Director for The City of
Cuyahoga Falls, Russ Balthis, The Law
Director for The City of Fairlawn, Bryan
Nace, The Law Director for The City of
Green, Interim Law Director Bill Chris,
The Law Director for The City of
Mogadore, Marshal M. Pitchford, The
Law Director for The City of Munroe
Falls, Tom Kostoff The Law Director for
The City of New Franklin, Irving B.

Sugerman, The Law Director for The City
of Norton, Justin Markey; The Law
Director for The City of Stow, Amber
Zibritosky; The Village Solicitor for The
Village of Boston Heights, Marshal
Pitchford, The Solicitor for Boston
Township, Ed Pullekins, Solicitor for The
Village of Clinton, Marshal Pitchford,
The Law Director for Copley Township,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Law Director for
Coventry Township, Irving B. Sugerman,
The Solicitor for The Village of Lakemore,
Irving B. Sugerman, The Solicitor for The
Village of Peninsula, Brad Bryan, The
Law Solicitor for The Village of Richfield,
William Hanna, The Solicitor The Village
of Silver Lake, Bob Heydorn, and The
Administrator & Legal Counsel for
Springfield Township, Warren Price v.

Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OK
City of Ada
City of Ada v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:19-op-45400
N.D. Ohio
(Federal)
OK
City of Altus
City of Altus v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:21-op-45046
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
OK
City of Anadarko
City of Anadarko v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:20-op-45022
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
OK
City of Bethany
City of Bethany v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-46148
N.D. Ohio
al.
(Federal)
OK
City of Broken
City of Broken Arrow v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45415
N.D. Ohio
Arrow
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
OK
City of Edmond
City of Edmond v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45496
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
OK
City of El Reno
City of El Reno v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45252
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
OK
City of Elk City
City of Elk City v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:21-op-45017
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
OK
City of Enid
City of Enid v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:19-op-45717
N.D. Ohio
Federal
OK
City of Guthrie
City of Guthrie v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45497
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
OK
City of Jenks
City of Jenks v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1: 1 9-op-45858
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
C-213

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
OK
City of Lawton
City of Lawton v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45500
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
OK
City of Midwest
City of Midwest City v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45709
N.D. Ohio
CityL.P.,
et al.

Federal
OK
City of Muskogee
City of Muskogee v. Teva
1:20-op-45162
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
OK
City of Mustang
City of Mustang v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45708
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
OK
City of Oklahoma
City of Oklahoma City v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45498
N.D. Ohio
City
L.P., et al.

Federal
OK
City of Owasso
City of Owasso v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45718
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
OK
City of Ponca City
City of Ponca City v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45495
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
OK
City of Seminole
City of Seminole v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:20-op-45004
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
OK
City of Shawnee
City of Shawnee v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-46155
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
OK
City of Stillwater
City of Stillwater v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:21-op-45045
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
OK
City of Tulsa
City of Tulsa v. Cephalon, Inc., et al.
1:21-op-45024
N.D. Ohio
Federal
OK
City of Yukon
City of Yukon v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45716
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
OK
County of Atoka
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners of Atoka
1:20-op-45001
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of Beckham
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Beckham County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45146
(Federal)
Commissioners)
USA, Inc., et al.

OK
County of Caddo
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners of Caddo
1:19-op-46156
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of Choctaw
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Choctaw County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:20-op-45257
(Federal)
Commissioners)
et al.

County of Cimarron
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Cimarron County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:20-op-45021
(Federal)
Commissioners)
et al.

County of Cleveland
The Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Cleveland County, State of Oklahoma v.
1:20-op-45009
(Federal)
Commissioners
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OK
County of Coal
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners of Coal
1:20-op-45149
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of
Comanche (Board
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
of County
Comanche County v. Purdue Pharma
1:20-op-45180
(Federal)
Commissioners
L.P., et al.

County of Craig
The County Commission of Craig County,
N.D. Ohio
OK
(County
Oklahoma v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:19-op-45652
(Federal)
Commission)
C-214

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
OK
County of Creek
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners of Creek
1:19-op-45226
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of Custer
Board of County Commissioners of Custer
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:20-op-45182
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Inc., et al.

County of Delaware
The Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Delaware County, State of Oklahoma v.
1: 1 8-op-46321
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

County of Dewey
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Dewey County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45801
(Federal)
Commissioners)
al.

County of Garvin
The Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Garvin County, State of Oklahoma v.
1:18-op-46304
(Federal)
Commissioners
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OK
County of Grady
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners of Grady
1:19-op-46167
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
OK
County of Greer
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners of Greer
1:20-op-45256
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of Harmon
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Harmon County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45388
(Federal)
Commissioners)
USA, Inc., et al.

County of Harper
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Harper County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45757
(Federal)
Commissioners)
al.

County of Haskell
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Haskell County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:20-op-45002
(Federal)
Commissioners)
al.

County of Hughes
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Hughes County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:20-op-45258
(Federal)
Commissioners)
al.

County of Jackson
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Jackson County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:20-op-45126
(Federal)
Commissioners
et al.

County of Jefferson
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Jefferson County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:1.9-op-46170
(Federal)
Commissioners)
et al.

County of Johnston
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Johnston County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45765
(Federal)
Commissioners)
et al.

OK
County of Kay
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners of Kay
1:19-op-45989
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
OK
County of Kiowa
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners ofKiowa
1:19-op-45755
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of Latimer
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Latimer County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:20-op-45003
(Federal)
Commissioners)
et al.

C-215

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
County of Le Flore
Board of County Commissioners of Le
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Flore County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:20-op-45067
(Federal)
Commissioners)
al.

County of Lincoln
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Lincoln County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:20-op-45128
(Federal)
Commissioners)
al.

OK
County of Logan
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners of Logan
1:20-op-45058
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
OK
County of Love
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners of Love
1:20-op-45000
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
OK
County of Major
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners ofMajor
1:19-op-45990
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
OK
County of Mayes
(County
The County Commission ofMayes County
1:19-op-45227
N.D. Ohio
Commission
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of McClain
The Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
McClain County, State of Oklahoma v.
1: 1 8-op-46303
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

County of
McCurtain (Board
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
of County
McCurtain County v. Purdue Pharma
1:20-op-45259
(Federal)
Commissioners)L.P.,
et al.

County of
Muskogee (Board of
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
County
Muskogee County v. Teva
1:20-op-45155
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

OK
County of Noble
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners ofNoble
1:20-op-45129
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of Nowata
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Nowata County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45225
(Federal)
Commissioners)
al.

County of Okfuskee
The Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Okfuskee County, State of Oklahoma v.
1:20-op-45005
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

County of
Oklahoma (Board of
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
County
Oklahoma County v. Purdue Pharma
1:20-op-45057
(Federal)
Commissioners
L.P., et al.

OK
County of
Okinulgee (County
The County Commission of Okmulgee
1:19-op-45223
N.D. Ohio
Commission)
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of Osage
Board of County Commissioners of Osage
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
County, State of Oklahoma v. Purdue
1:18-op-46322
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Pharma L.P., et al.

County of Ottawa
The Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Ottawa County, State of Oklahoma v.
1:18-op-46323
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

C-216

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
County of Pawnee
The Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Pawnee County, State of Oklahoma v.
1:18-op-46320
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

OK
County of Payne
(County
The County Commission of Payne County,
1:19-op-45653
N.D. Ohio
Commission
Oklahoma v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of Pittsburg
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Pittsburg County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45711
(Federal)
Commissioners)
et al.

County of
Pottawatomie
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Pottawatomie County v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45988
(Federal)
Commissioners)
L.P., et al.

County of Roger
Mills (Board of
Board of County Commissioners of Roger
N.D. Ohio
OK
County
Mills County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45183
(Federal)
Commissioners)USA,
Inc., et al.

OK
County of Rogers
(County
The County Commission of Rogers
1:19-op-45224
N.D. Ohio
Commission
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of Seminole
The Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Seminole County, State of Oklahoma v.
1:19-op-45260
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

County of Stephens
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Stephens County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45756
(Federal)
Commissioners)
et al.

OK
County of Texas
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners of Texas
1:20-op-45061
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of Tillman
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Tillman County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45185
(Federal)
Commissioners)
USA, Inc., et al.

OK
County of Tulsa
(Board of County
Board of County Commissioners of Tulsa
1:19-op-45352
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of
OK
Washington
The County Commission of Washington
1:1.9-op-45222
N.D. Ohio
(County
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Commission
County of Woods
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
(Board of County
Woods County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45987
(Federal)
Commissioners)
al.

County of
Woodward (Board
Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
OK
of County
Woodward County v. Purdue Pharma
1:20-op-45141
(Federal)
Commissioners
L.P., et al.

OR
City of Portland
City of Portland v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45633
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
County
County of Clackamas, County of Lane,
N.D. Ohio
OR
Clackamas a
County of Washington v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45442
(Federal)
L.P., et al.

OR
County of Coos
Coos County, Oregon v. Purdue Pharma
1: 1 8-op-46300
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
C-217

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
OR
County of Curry
County of Curry v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45512
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
County of Clackamas, County of Lane,
N.D. Ohio
OR
County of Lane
County of Washington v. Purdue Pharma
1: 1 8-op-45442
(Federal)
L.P., et al.

OR
County of
County of Multnomah v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45377
N.D. Ohio
Multnomah
L.P., et al.

Federal
County of
County of Clackamas, County of Lane,
N.D. Ohio
OR
Washington
County of Washington v. Purdue Pharma
1: 1 8-op-45442
(Federal)
L.P., et al.

PA
Borough of
Borough of Edwardsville, Pennsylvania v.
1:19-op-46176
N.D. Ohio
Edwardsville
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
PA
Borough of Exeter
Borough of Exeter, Pennsylvania v. Teva
1:20-op-45019
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
PA
Borough of Forty
Forty Fort Borough, Pennsylvania v. Teva
1:19-op-46177
N.D. Ohio
Fort
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
PA
Borough of
Kingston Borough, Pennsylvania v.
1:19-op-45585
N.D. Ohio
Kingston
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PA
Borough of
Morrisville Borough, Pennsylvania v.
1:19-op-45435
N.D. Ohio
Morrisville
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PA
Borough of Sugar
Sugar Notch Borough, Pennsylvania v.
1:20-op-45090
N.D. Ohio
Notch
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
180701963 /
Litigation
PA
Borough of
Wampum Borough v. Purdue Pharma
2017-008095
(PA - Court
Wampum
L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL)
PA
Borough of West
West Pittston, Pennsylvania v. Purdue
1:19-op-45997
N.D. Ohio
Pittston
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
PA
Borough of
Wyoming, Pennsylvania v. Teva
1:20-op-45087
N.D. Ohio
Wyoming
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
City ofNew Castle, City of Aliquippa and
N.D. Ohio
PA
City of Aliquippa
Union Township v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45939
(Federal)
et al.

PA
City of Allentown
City of Allentown, Pennsylvania v. Purdue
1:19-op-45824
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PA
City of Coatesville
City of Coatesville, Pennsylvania v. Teva
1:19-op-45396
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
PA
City of Hazelton
City ofHazelton, Pennsylvania v. Purdue
1:19-op-45724
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MDL -
Pennsylvania
2017-007778 /
Opioid
PA
City of Lock Haven
City of Lock Haven v. Purdue Pharma
2017-008095
Litigation
L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
(PA - Court
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
C-218

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
County)
State MDL
PA
City of Nanticoke
City of Nanticoke, Pennsylvania v. Purdue
1:19-op-45081
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
City of New Castle, City of Aliquippa and
N.D. Ohio
PA
City of New Castle
Union Township v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 1 8-op-45939
(Federal)
et al.

MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
City of Philadelphia v. Allergan Limited,
2021-007975 /
Litigation
PA
City of Philadelphia
et al. / City of Philadelphia v. Allergan
18002718 /
(PA - Court
plc, et al.
2017-008095
of Common
(coordinated)
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
PA
City of Wilkes-
City of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania v.
1: 1 8-op-45545
N.D. Ohio
Barre
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PA
County of Adams
Adams County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:20-op-45140
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
2017-1570-GV /
Litigation
PA
County of
County of Armstrong v. Purdue Pharma
2017-008095
(PA - Court
Armstrong
L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL)
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
11326-2017 /
Litigation
PA
County of Beaver
County of Beaver v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2017-008095
(PA - Court
et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL)
PA
County of Bedford
Bedford County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45184
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
2018 CV 0059 /
Litigation
PA
County of Bradford
County of Bradford v. Purdue Pharma
2017-008095
(PA - Court
L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
C-219

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
2018-03144 /
Litigation
PA
County of Bucks
Bucks County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
2017-008095
(PA - Court
al.
(coordinated)
of on
Pleas
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
2017-4131 /
Litigation
PA
County of Cambria
County of Cambria v. Purdue Pharma
2017-008095
(PA - Court
L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
2018-000990 /
Litigation
PA
County of Carbon
County of Carbon v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2017-008095
(PA - Court
et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
PA
County of Chester
Chester County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45233
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
285 CD 2018 /
Litigation
PA
County of Clarion
County of Clarion v. Purdue Pharma
2017-008095
(PA - Court
L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
752-18 / 2017-
Litigation
PA
County of Clinton
County of Clinton v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
008095
(PA - Court
et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
C-220

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
PA
County of Columbia
Columbia County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45068
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
2018-02147 /
Litigation
PA
County of
County of Cumberland v. Purdue Pharma
2017-008095
(PA - Court
Cumberland
L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
2017-2676 /
Litigation
PA
County of Fayette
County of Fayette v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2017-008095
(PA - Court
et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
2019-02445 /
Litigation
PA
County of Franklin
Franklin County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2017-008095
(PA - Court
et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
791-2017 / 2017-
Litigation
PA
County of Greene
County of Greene v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
008095
(PA - Court
et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
2018-0784 /
Litigation
PA
County of
County of Huntingdon v. Purdue Pharma
(PA - Court
Huntingdon
L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
C-221

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
PA
County of Indiana
Indiana County, Pennsylvania v. Purdue
1:18-op-45249
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
2017 CV 5156 /
Litigation
PA
County of
County of Lackawanna v. Purdue Pharma
2017-008095
(PA - Court
Lackawanna
L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
11180-17 / 2017-
Litigation
PA
County of Lawrence
County of *Lawrence v. Purdue Pharma
008095
(PA - Court
L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, The
2018-C-716 /
Litigation
PA
County of Lehigh
People of Lehigh County, Lehigh County,
2017-008095
(PA - Court
Pennsylvania v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
(coordinated)
of Common
al.

Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
PA
County of Luzerne
Luzerne County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45100
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
PA
County of
County ofLycoming, Pennsylvania v.
1:19-op-45655
N.D. Ohio
Lycoming
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
2018-1596 /
Litigation
PA
County of Mercer
County of Mercer v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2017-008095
(PA - Court
et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
County of Monroe v. Purdue Pharma
3972CV 18 /
Opioid
PA
County of Monroe
L.P., et al.
2017-008095
Litigation
(coordinated)
(PA - Court
of Common
Pleas of
C-222

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
The People of Northampton County and
C48-CV-2017-
Litigation
PA
County of
Northampton County, Pennsylvania v.
11557 / 2017-
(PA - Court
Northampton
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
008095
of Common
(coordinated)
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
PA
County of
County of Northumberland, Pennsylvania
1:19-op-45555
N.D. Ohio
Northumberland
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
2017-6268 /
Litigation
PA
County of
County of Washington v. Purdue Pharma
2017-008095
(PA - Court
Washington
L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
5975-2017 /
Litigation
PA
County of
County of Westmoreland v. Purdue
2017-008095
(PA - Court
Westmoreland
Pharma L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
PA
County of Wyoming
Wyoming County, Pennsylvania v. Purdue
1:18-op-45488
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
2017-SU-003372
Litigation
PA
County of York
County of York v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
/ 2017-008095
(PA - Court
al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
PA
Delaware County
Delaware County, Pennsylvania v.
2017-008095
Opioid
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
Litigation
(PA - Court
of Common
C-223

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
District Attorney of
Opioid
Allegheny County
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, acting
21-947 / 2017-
Litigation
PA
(District Attorney
by and through Allegheny County District
008095
(PA - Court
Stephen A. Zappala,
Attorney Stephen A. Zappala, Jr. v. Teva
(coordinated)
of Common
Jr)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
District Attorney of
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, acting
19-18232 / 2017-
PA - Court of
Common
PA
Berks County
by and through John T. Adams, the
008095
Pleas of
(District Attorney
District Attorney of Berks County v.
(coordinated)
Berks County
John T. Adams)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

State
MDL -
Pennsylvania
District Attorney of
Opioid
Bucks County
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, acting
2020-00639 /
Litigation
PA
(District Attorney
by and through Matthew D. Weintraub,
2017-008095
(PA - Court
Matthew D.
the District Attorney of Bucks County v.
(coordinated)
of Common
Weintraub)
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
District Attorney of
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, acting
2020-04553 /
Litigation
PA
Chester County
by and through Deborah S. Ryan, the
(PA - Court
(District Attorney
District Attorney of Chester County v.
(coordinated)
(coordinated)
of Common
Deborah S. Ryan)
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL)
PA
District Attorney of
District Attorney of Clearfield County v.
1:21-op-45022
N.D. Ohio
Clearfield Count
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
PA - Court of
District Attorney of
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, acting
2019-CV-7795 /
Common
PA
Dauphin County
by and through Francis T. Chardo, the
Pleas of
(District Attorney
District Attorney of Dauphin County V.
(coordinated)
(coordinated)
Dauphin
Francis T. Chardo)
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

County
State
MDL -
District Attorney of
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, acting
CV-2020-
Pennsylvania
PA
Delaware County
by and through Jack Stollsteimer, the
002026 / 2017-
Opioid
(District Attorney
District Attorney of Delaware County v.
008095
Litigation
Jack Stollsteimer)
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(coordinated)
(PA - Court
of Common
C-224

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
District Attorney of
PA - Court of
Northampton
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, acting
C-48-CV-2020-
Common
PA
County (District
by and through Terence P. Houck, the
3440 / 2017-
Pleas of
Attorney Terence P.

District Attorney of Northampton County
008095
Northampton
Houck)
v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(coordinated)
County
State
MDL -
Pennsylvania
District Attorney of
Opioid
Philadelphia
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, acting
18005594 /
Litigation
PA
(District Attorney
by and through Philadelphia District
2017-008095
(PA - Court
Lawrence S.

Attorney Lawrence S. Krasner v. Purdue
(coordinated)
of Common
Krasner)
Pharma L.P., et al.

Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
District Attorney of
Opioid
Westmoreland
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, acting
CI02561
1 20/
Litigation
PA
County (District
W. ct
by and through John Peck, the Distri
20CIO25
(PA - Court
Attorney John W.

Attorney of Westmoreland County v. Teva
(coordinated)
of Common
Peck)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
PA - Court of
Municipality of
The Municipality of Norristown and the
2019-12178 /
Common
Pleas of
PA
Norristown
Township of West Norriton v. Purdue
2017-008095
Montgomery
Pharma L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
County
(State)
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
Southeastern
Southeastern Pennsylvania
Litigation
PA
Pennsylvania
Transportation Authority v. Endo
180302923
(PA - Court
Transportation
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al.
of Common
Authority
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Township of
Township of Bensalem v. Purdue Pharma
2018-03119 /
Opioid
PA
Bensalem
L.P., et al.
2017-008095
Litigation
(coordinated)
(PA - Court
of Common
Pleas of
C-225

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Delaware
County)
State MDL
PA
Township of Bristol
Bristol Township, Pennsylvania v. Purdue
1:19-op-45434
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PA
Township of
Fairview Township, Pennsylvania v.
1:19-op-45355
N.D. Ohio
Fairview
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PA
Township of
Hanover Township, Pennsylvania v.
1:19-op-45654
N.D. Ohio
Hanover
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PA
Township of Lower
Lower Makefield Township v. Teva
1:20-op-45284
N.D. Ohio
Makefield
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
PA
Township of Lower
Lower Southampton, Pennsylvania v.
1:20-op-45181
N.D. Ohio
Southampton
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
180603466 /
Litigation
PA
Township of
Mahoning Township v. Purdue Pharma
2017-008095
(PA - Court
Mahoning
L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
PA
Township of
Middletown Township v. Teva
1:21-op-45030
N.D. Ohio
Middletown
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
2019-03043-0 /
Litigation
PA
Township of
Newtown Township v. Purdue Pharma
2017-008095
(PA - Court
Newtown
L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
PA
Township of Plains
Plains Township, Pennsylvania v. Purdue
1:18-op-46215
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
City ofNew Castle, City ofAliguippa and
N.D. Ohio
PA
Township of Union
Union Township v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45939
(Federal)
et al.

MDL -
Pennsylvania
Opioid
2019-01469-0 /
Litigation
PA
Township of
Warminster Township v. Purdue Pharma
(PA - Court
Warminster
L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
(coordinated)
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
PA
Township of
Warrington Township v. Purdue Pharma
CV-2019-
MDL -
Pennsylvania
Warrington
L.P., et al.
007269 / 2017-
Opioid
C-226

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
008095
Litigation
(coordinated)
(PA - Court
of Common
Pleas of
Delaware
County)
State MDL
PA - Court of
Township of West
The Municipality of Norristown and the
2019-12178 /
Common
Pleas of
PA
Norriton
Township of West Norriton v. Purdue
2017-008095
Montgomery
Pharma L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
County
(State)
PA
Township of
Wilkes-Barre Township, Pennsylvania v.
1:19-op-45325
N.D. Ohio
Wilkes-Barre
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PA
Township of Wright
Wright Township, Pennsylvania v. Purdue
1:19-op-45574
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PR
Municipality of
Municipality ofAdjuntas, Puerto Rico V.
1:20-op-45245
N.D. Ohio
Ad'untas
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
PR
Municipality of
Municipality ofAguada, Puerto Rico v.
3:22-cv-01532
D. Puerto
Rico
Aguada
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
PR
Municipality of
Municipality ofAguadilla, Puerto Rico V.
3:22-cv-01533
D. Puerto
Rico
Aguadilla
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
PR
Municipality of
Municipality ofArroyo, Puerto Rico v.
1:19-op-45817
N.D. Ohio
Arroyo
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PR
Municipality of
Municipality of Barceloneta, Puerto Rico
1:20-op-45267
N.D. Ohio
Barceloneta
v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
PR
Municipality of
Municipality of Bayamon, Puerto Rico v.
1:19-op-45818
N.D. Ohio
Bayamon
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
PR
Municipality of
Municipality of Caguas, Puerto Rico v.
1:19-op-45814
N.D. Ohio
Caguas
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
PR
Municipality of
Municipality of Canovanas, Puerto Rico
1:18-op-46018
N.D. Ohio
Canovanas
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
PR
Municipality of
Municipality of Catano, Puerto Rico v.
1:19-op-45816
N.D. Ohio
Catano
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Municipality of
Municipality of Sabana Grande and
N.D. Ohio
PR
Cay y e
Municipality of Cayey v. Purdue Pharma
1:1.8-op-45197
( Federal)
L.P., et al.

PR
Municipality of
Municipality of Ceiba, Puerto Rico v.
1:19-op-45819
N.D. Ohio
Ceiba
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PR
Municipality of
Municipality of Cidra, Puerto Rico v.
1:20-op-45244
N.D. Ohio
Cidra
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
PR
Municipality of
Municipality of Coamo, Puerto Rico v.
1:19-op-45820
N.D. Ohio
Coamo
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PR
Municipality of
Municipality of Guayanilla, Puerto Rico
1:18-op-45176
N.D. Ohio
Gua anilla
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PR
Municipality of Isla
Municipality oflsla de Vieques, Puerto
1:19-op-45752
N.D. Ohio
de Vieques
Rico v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PR
Municipality of
Municipality ofJuncos, Puerto Rico v.
1:18-op-45994
N.D. Ohio
Juncos
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al
Federal
C-227

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
PR
Municipality of
Municipality ofLoiza, Puerto Rico v.
1:18-op-45177
N.D. Ohio
Loiza
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PR
Municipality of Rio
Municipality of Rio Grande, Puerto Rico
1:18-op-45895
N.D. Ohio
Grande
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Municipality of
Municipality of Sabana Grande and
N.D. Ohio
PR
Sabana Grande
Municipality of Cayey v. Purdue Pharma
1: 1 8-op-45197
(Federal)
L.P., et al.

Municipality of San
Municipality of San Juan, of the
N.D. Ohio
PR
Juan
Commonwealth ofPuerto Rico v. Johnson
1:21-op-45082
(Federal)
& Johnson, et al.

PR
Municipality of
Municipality of Vega Alta, Puerto Rico v.
1:18-op-46011
N.D. Ohio
Ve a Alta
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PR
Municipality of
Municipality of Villalba, Puerto Rico v.
1:19-op-45815
N.D. Ohio
Villalba
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
PR
Municipality of
Municipality of Yabucoa, Puerto Rico V.
1:18-op-45731
N.D. Ohio
Yabucoa
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2019-CP-104294
Opioid
Litigation
SC
City of Charleston
City of Charleston v. Purdue Pharma
/ 2018-CP-
(SC - 13th
L.P., et al.
2301294
(master) master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
SC
City of Chester
City of Chester, South Carolina v. Purdue
1:19-op-45606
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
SC
City of Columbia
City of Columbia, South Carolina v.
1:19-op-45979
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al
(Federal)
SC
City of Georgetown
Georgetown City, South Carolina v.
1:19-op-45613
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2019-CP-
Opioid
SC
City of Myrtle
City of Myrtle Beach v. Teva
2605556 / 2018-
Litigation
th
Beach
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
2019-CP-103978
Carolina
SC
City of North
City of North Charleston v. Purdue
/ 2018-CP-
Opioid
Litigation
Charleston
Pharma L.P., et al.
2301294
(SC - 13th
(master)
Judicial
Circuit,
Count of
C-228

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Greenville)
State MDL
SC
City of Orangeburg
City of Orangeburg v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45607
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2019-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Abbeville
County of Abbeville v. Purdue Pharma
0100154 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
L.P., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2019-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Aiken
County of Aiken v. Rite Aid of South
0201086 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Allendale
County of Allendale v. Rite Aid of South
0300125 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL)
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-04-
Opioid
SC
County of Anderson
County ofAnderson v. Rite Aid of South
01108 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
2018CP0500189
MDL - In re
SC
County of Bamberg
County of Bamberg v. Rite Aid of South
/ 2018-CP-
South
Carolina
Carolina, Inc., et al.
2301294
Opioid
(master)
Litigation
C-229

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
(SC - 13th
Judicial
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018CP0600329
Opioid
SC
County of Barnwell
County of Barnwell v. Rite Aid of South
/ 2018-CP-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.
2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Beaufort
County of Beaufort v. Rite Aid of South
0701245 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
SC
County of Berkeley
County of Berkeley, South Carolina v.
1:1.9-op-45436
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2019-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Calhoun
County of Calhoun v. Rite Aid of South
0900065 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
SC
County of
Charleston County, South Carolina v.
1:19-op-45803
N.D. Ohio
Charleston
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MDL - In re
South
2018-CP-
Carolina
SC
County of Cherokee
County of Cherokee v. Rite Aid of South
1100503 / 2018-
Opioid
Litigation
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
(SC - 13th
(master)
Judicial
Circuit,
County of
C-230

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2020-CP-
Opioid
County of Chester v. Teva
1200373 / 2018-
Litigation
SC
County of Chester
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
(SC - 13th
(master)
Judicial
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of
County of Chesterfield v. Rite Aid of
1300410 / 2018-
Litigation
13th
Chesterfield
South Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2019-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of
County of Clarendon v. Purdue Pharma
1400236 / 2018-
Litigation
13th
Clarendon
L.P., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL)
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-15-
Opioid
SC
County of Colleton
County of Colleton v. Rite Aid of South
00438 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
2019CP1700213
Carolina
SC
County of Dillon
County of Dillon v. Rite Aid of South
/ 2018-CP-
Opioid
Carolina, Inc., et al.
2301294
Litigation
(master)
(SC - 13th
Judicial
Circuit,
C-231

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of
County of Dorchester v. Rite Aid of South
1801122 / 2018-
Litigation
13th
Dorchester
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2019-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Edgefield
County of'Edgefield v. Rite Aid of South
1900120 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Fairfield
County of Fairfield v. Rite Aid of South
2000272 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL)
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2019-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Florence
County of Florence v. Rite Aid of South
2101213 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
SC
County of
Georgetown County, South Carolina v.
1:19-op-45612
N.D. Ohio
Georgetown
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
2018-CP-
MDL - In re
SC
County of
County of Greenville v. Rite Aid of South
2301294
South
Greenville
Carolina, Inc., et al.
(master)
Carolina
Opioid
C-232

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Judicial
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of
County of Greenwood v. Rite Aid of South
2400775 / 2018-
Litigation
13th
Greenwood
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Hampton
County of Hampton v. Rite Aid of South
2500258 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2019-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Horry
County of Horry v. Rite Aid of South
2602684 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Jasper
County of Jasper v. Rite Aid of South
2700332 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
SC
County of Kershaw
County of Kershaw v. Rite Aid of South
2018-CP-
MDL - In re
South
Carolina, Inc., et al.
2800553 / 2018-
Carolina
C-233

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
CP-2301294
Opioid
(master)
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Judicial
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2019CP2900540
Opioid
County of Lancaster v. Rite Aid of South
/ 2018-CP-
Litigation
SC
County of Lancaster
Carolina, Inc., et al.
2301294
(SC - 13th
(master)
Judicial
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Laurens
County of Laurens v. Rite Aid of South
3000606 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
County of Lee v. Rite Aid of South
3100207 / 2018-
Litigation
SC
County of Lee
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
(SC - 13th
(master)
Judicial
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of
County of Lexington v. Rite Aid of South
3202207 / 2018-
Litigation
13th
Lexington
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
SC
County of Marion
County of Marion v. Rite Aid of South
2019-CP-
MDL - In re
Carolina, Inc., et al.
3300299 / 2018-
South
C-234

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
CP-2301294
Carolina
(master)
Opioid
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Judicial
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2020-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Marlboro
County of Marlboro v. Teva
3400184 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et at.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2019-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of
County of McCormick v. Rite Aid of South
3500031 / 2018-
Litigation
13th
McCormick
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2019-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Newberry
County of Newberry v. Teva
3600636 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Oconee
County of Oconee v. Rite Aid of South
3700458 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
(State MDL)
C-235

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of
County of Orangeburg v. Rite Aid of
3800841 / 2018-
Litigation
13th
Orangeburg
South Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Pickens
County of Pickens v. Rite Aid ofSouth
3900675 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
SC
County of Richland
Richland County, South Carolina v.
1:19-op-45327
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2019-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Saluda
County of Saluda v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
4100111 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL)
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of
County of Spartanburg v. Rite Aid of
4200760 / 2018-
Litigation
13th
Spartanburg
South Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
2019-CP-
Carolina
SC
County of Sumter
County of Sumter v. Rite Aid of South
4300891 / 2018-
Opioid
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Litigation
(master)
(SC - 13th
Judicial
Circuit,
C-236

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of Union
County of Union v. Rite Aid of South
4400288 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of
County of Williamsburg v. Rite Aid of
4500276 / 2018-
Litigation
13th
Williamsburg
South Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2018-CP-
Opioid
SC
County of York
County of York v. Rite Aid of South
4602446 / 2018-
Litigation
(SC - 13th
Carolina, Inc., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL)
Medical University Hospital Authority,
Medical University
Medical University of South Carolina and
N.D. Ohio
SC
Hospital Authority
University Medical Associates of The
1:20-op-45197
(Federal)
Medical University Of South Carolina v.

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Medical University Hospital Authority,
Medical University
Medical University of South Carolina and
N.D. Ohio
SC
of South Carolina
University Medical Associates of The
1:20-op-45197
(Federal)
Medical University Of South Carolina v.

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

MDL - In re
2019-CP-104302
South
Carolina
SC
Town of Mount
Town of Mount Pleasant v. Purdue
/ 2018-CP-
Opioid
Pleasant
Pharma L.P., et al.
2301294
Litigation
(master)
(SC - 13th
Judicial
C-237

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
MDL - In re
South
Carolina
2019-CP-
Opioid
SC
Town of
Town of Summerville v. Purdue Pharma
1801602 / 2018-
Litigation
th
Summerville
L.P., et al.

CP-2301294
Judicial
(master)
Circuit,
County of
Greenville)
State MDL
University Medical
Medical University Hospital Authority,
Associates of the
Medical University of South Carolina and
N.D. Ohio
SC
Medical University
University Medical Associates of The
1:20-op-45197
(Federal)
of South Carolina
Medical University Of South Carolina v.

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

TN
City of Clarksville
The City of Clarksville, Tennessee v.
1:18-op-45517
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
TN
City of Gatlinburg
City of Gatlinburg, Tennessee v. Teva
1:21-op 45071
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., et al.

Federal
The Cities of Maryville, Pigeon Forge,
TN
City of Germantown
Ripley and Germantown, Tennessee, and
1:20-op-45199
N.D. Ohio
the Town ofDecatur, Tennessee v. Teva
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Lexington, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
City of Lexington
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45458
(Federal)
al.

The Cities of Maryville, Pigeon Forge,
TN
City of Maryville
Ripley and Germantown, Tennessee, and
1:20-op-45199
N.D. Ohio
the Town of Decatur, Tennessee v. Teva
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

TN
City of Memphis
City of Memphis v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45220
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
TN
City of Millington
City of Millington, Tennessee v. Purdue
1:19-op-45474
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
The Cities of Maryville, Pigeon Forge,
TN
City of Pigeon
Ripley and Germantown, Tennessee, and
1:20-op-45199
N.D. Ohio
Forge
the Town of Decatur, Tennessee v. Teva
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

The Cities of Maryville, Pigeon Forge,
TN
City of Ripley
Ripley and Germantown, Tennessee, and
1:20-op-45199
N.D. Ohio
the Town ofDecatur, Tennessee v. Teva
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

TN
County of Blount
Blount County and Jefferson County v.
1:19-op-45132
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Campbell County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
County of Campbell
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45133
(Federal)
al.

C-238

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
TN
County of Cannon
Cannon County, Tennessee v. Purdue
1:18-op-45924
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
TN
County of Claiborne
Claiborne County, Tennessee v. Purdue
1:19-op-45658
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Crockett County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
County of Crockett
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45215
(Federal)
al.

TN
County of Decatur
Decatur County, Tennessee v. Purdue
1:19-op-45789
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Fentress County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
County of Fentress
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45419
(Federal)
al.

Greene County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
County of Greene
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45136
(Federal)
al.

TN
County of Hamilton
Hamilton County, Tennessee v. Purdue
1:18-op-45507
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Hancock County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
County of Hancock
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45153
(Federal)
al.

Hawkins County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
County of Hawkins
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45299
(Federal)
al.

Haywood County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
County of Haywood
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45107
(Federal)
al.

County of
Henderson County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
Henderson
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45404
(Federal)
TN
County of Jefferson
Blount County and Jefferson County v.
1:19-op-45132
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Johnson County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
County of Johnson
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation et
1:18-op-45164
(Federal)
al.

County of
Lauderdale County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
Lauderdale
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46324
(Federal)
Madison County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
County of Madison
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.8-op-45403
(Federal)
al.

County of
Montgomery County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
Montgomery
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45418
(Federal)
TN
County of Morgan
Morgan County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45075
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
TN
County of Obion
Obion County, Tennessee v. Teva
1:19-op-461.15
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
Overton County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
County of Overton
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45568
(Federal)
al.

Pickett County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
County of Pickett
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45242
(Federal)
al.

C-239

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
TN
County of
Rutherford County, Tennessee v. Purdue
1:18-op-45258
N.D. Ohio
Rutherford
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
TN
County of Scott
Scott County, Tennessee v. Purdue
1:18-op-45273
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
TN - Circuit
TN
County of Shelby
Shelby County Government v. Purdue
CT-004500-17
Court for
Shelby
Pharma L.P., et al.

County
State
TN
County of Smith
Smith County, Tennessee v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45029
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
TN
County of Sumner
Sumner County, Tennessee v. Purdue
1:18-op-45255
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
County of
Washington County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
Washington
al erisoureeBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46317
(Federal)
County of
Williamson County, Tennessee v.

N.D. Ohio
TN
Williamson
al erisoureeBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45134
(Federal)
Hamblen County
Hancock County Board of Education and
N.D. Ohio
TN
Board of Education
Hamblen County Board of Education v.
1:22-op-45027
(Federal)
Ce halon, Inc., et al.

Hancock County
Hancock County Board of Education and
N.D. Ohio
TN
Board of Education
Hamblen County Board of Education v.
1:22-op-45027
(Federal)
Ce halon, Inc., et al.

Metropolitan
Metropolitan Government of Nashville
TN
Government of
and Davidson County, Tennessee v.
1: 1 8-op-45088
N.D. Ohio
Nashville and
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Davidson CountyPurdue
TN
Town of Arlington
Town of Arlington, Tennessee v. Purdue
1:19-op-45471
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
TN
Town of Centerville
Town of Centerville, Tennessee v. Purdue
1:19-op-45425
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
TN
Town of Dandridge
The Town of Dandridge, Tennessee v.
1:20-op-45216
N.D. Ohio
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
The Cities of Maryville, Pigeon Forge,
TN
Town of Decatur
Ripley and Germantown, Tennessee, and
1:20-op-45199
N.D. Ohio
the Town ofDecatur, Tennessee v. Teva
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Bexar County
Litigation
Hospital District
Bexar County Hospital District d/b/a
2020-17501 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
University
University Health System v. Teva
2018-63587
Judicial
Heal
Health System
pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., et al.
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
TX - 21 st
TX
Burleson County
Burleson County Hospital District v.
29740
Judicial
Hospital District
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

District Court
of Burleson
C-240

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
County
(State)
TX
City of Eagle Pass
The City of Eagle Pass, Texas v. Purdue
1:18-op-46033
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
City of Houston, Texas v. Purdue Pharma
2019-43219 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
City of Houston
L.P., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
TX
City of Laredo
The City ofLaredo, Texas v. Purdue
1:18-op-46026
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
City of Leon Valley v. Teva
2020-39837 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
City of Leon Valley
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
TX
City of San Antonio
City of San Antonio, Texas v. Purdue
1:19-op-45833
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
TX
County of Angelina
County ofAngelina v. Purdue Pharma
1:20-op-45053
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
TX
County of Bailey
County ofBailey, Texas v. Teva
1:20-op-45264
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Bastrop v. Teva
2020-17434 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Bastrop
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL)
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Bexar v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2018-77066 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Bexar
et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
TX
County of Bowie
County of Bowie v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45159
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
TX
County of Brazos
Brazos County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45863
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
C-241

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Brooks v. Teva
2020-17509 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Brooks
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Caldwell v. Teva
2020-17563 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Caldwell
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Calhoun v. Teva
2020-17536 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Calhoun
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Cameron v. Purdue Pharma
2018-77093 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Cameron
L.P., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL)
TX
County of Camp
County of Camp v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45301
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
MDL - In re
County of Castro, County of Colorado,
Texas Opioid
County of Jefferson, County of Madison,
Litigation
County ofRoberts, County of San Saba,
2020-37584 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Castro
County of Shackelford, County of Terrell,
2018-63587
Judicial
Irving Independent School District and
(master)
District of
Texarkana Independent School District v.

Harris
AbbVie Inc., et al.

County)
State MDL
TX
County of Cherokee
County of Cherokee v. Purdue Pharma
1:17-op-45155
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
TX
County of Childress
County of Childress v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45229
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
TX
County of Clay
County of Clay v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45169
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
C-242

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MDL - In re
County of Castro, County of Colorado,
Texas Opioid
County of Jefferson, County of Madison,
Litigation
County of Roberts, County of San Saba,
2020-37584 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Colorado
County of Shackelford, County of Terrell,
2018-63587
Judicial
Irving Independent School District and
(master)
District of
Texarkana Independent School District v.

Harris
Abb Vie Inc., et al.

County)
State MDL
TX
County of Coryell
County of Coryell v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:22-op-45009
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Dallas v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2018-77098 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Dallas
et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County ofDelta v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2018-77104 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Delta
et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County ofDuval v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2018-87879 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Duval
et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL)
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of El Paso v. Purdue Pharma
2018-76970 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of El Paso
L.P., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
MDL - In re
2019-41572 /
Texas Opioid
TX
County of Ellis
Ellis County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
2018-63587
Litigation
(TX - 152nd
(master)
Judicial
District of
C-243

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Harris
County)
State MDL
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Falls v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
2018-77106 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Falls
al
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
TX - 400th
Judicial
TX
County of Fort Bend
County of Fort Bend, Texas v. Purdue
19-DCV-263509
District Court
Pharma L.P., et al.
of Fort Bend
County
State
TX
County of Franklin
County of Franklin v. Purdue Pharma
1: 1 8-op-45302
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
TX
County of Freestone
County of Freestone v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45985
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
TX
County of Galveston
County of Galveston v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45239
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of
County of Guadalupe v. Teva
2020-16457 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
Guadalupe
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
TX - 133rd
2017-82618 /
Judicial
TX
County of Harris
County of Harris v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2018-63587
District Court
et al.
(master)
of Harris
County
(State)
N.D. Ohio
(Federal) /
MDL - In re
1:17-op-45087 /
Texas Opioid
County of Harrison v. Purdue Pharma
2018-77108 /
Litigation
TX
County of Harrison
L.P., et al. / County of Harrison v. Purdue
2018-63587
(TX - 152nd
Pharma L.P., et al.
(master)
Judicial
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
TX
County of Haskell
County of Haskell v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45223
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
C-244

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Hays v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
2020-16529 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Hays
USA, Inc., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
TX
County of
County of Henderson v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45684
N.D. Ohio
Henderson
L.P., et al.

Federal
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Hidalgo v. Purdue Pharma
2018-77109 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Hidalgo
L.P., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Hopkins v. Purdue Pharma
2018-77111 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Hopkins
L.P., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
MDL - In re
County of Castro, County of Colorado,
Texas Opioid
County of Jefferson, County of Madison,
Litigation
County ofRoberts, County ofSan Saba,
2020-37584 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Jefferson
County of Shackelford, County of Terrell,
2018-63587
Judicial
Irving Independent School District and
(master)
District of
Texarkana Independent School District v.

Harris
Abb Vie Inc., et al.

County)
State MDL)
TX - 229th
2019-49060 /
Judicial
TX
County of Jim Hogg
County of Jim Hogg v. Purdue Pharma
2018-63587
District Court
L.P., et al.
(master)
of Jim Hogg
County
State
TX - 79th
19-06-59579-CV
Judicial
TX
County of Jim Wells
County ofJim Wells v. Purdue Pharma
/ 2018-63587
District Court
L.P., et al.
(master)
of Jim Wells
County
State
Johnson County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2018-87346 /
MDL - In re
TX
County of Johnson
et al.
2018-63587
Texas Opioid
master
Litigation
C-245

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
(TX - 152nd
Judicial
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
TX
County of Jones
County ofJones v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45139
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
TX
County of Kaufman
Kaufman County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-46081
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
TX
County of Kendall
County of Kendall v. Purdue Pharma
1:22-op-45010
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County ofKerr v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
2018-77114 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Kerr
al
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
TX
County of Kinney
County of Kinney v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 1 8-op-45241
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
TX - 105th
2019-49074 /
Judicial
TX
County of Kleberg
County ofKleberg v. Purdue Pharma
2018-63587
District Court
L.P., et al.
(master)
of Kleberg
County
(State)
TX
County of La Salle
County of La Salle v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45234
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
TX
County of Lamar
County of Lamar v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45162
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
TX
County of Leon
County of Leon v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
I :1.9-op-45240
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County ofLiberty v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2018-77116 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Liberty
et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Lubbock v. Teva
2020-16529 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Lubbock
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
C-246

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MDL - In re
County of Castro, County of Colorado,
Texas Opioid
County of Jefferson, County of Madison,
Litigation
County of Roberts, County of San Saba,
2020-37584 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Madison
County of Shackelford, County of Terrell,
2018-63587
Judicial
Irving Independent School District and
(master)
District of
Texarkana Independent School District v.

Harris
Abb Vie Inc., et al.

County)
State MDL
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
2018-77026 /
(TX - 152nd
Maverick County, Texas v. Purdue
1:19-op-45426 /
Judicial
TX
County of Maverick
Pharma L.P., et al. /Maverick County,
2018-63587
District of
Texas v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(master)
Harris
County)
(State MDL)
/ N.D. Ohio
Federal
TX
County of Mitchell
County of Mitchell v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45063
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
TX
County of
County of Montgomery v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45030
N.D. Ohio
Montgomery
L.P., et al.

Federal
TX
County of Morris
County ofMorris v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45086
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
TX
County of Nolan
County of Nolan v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45061
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Nueces and Nueces County
2018-77083 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Nueces
Hospital District v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2018-63587
Judicial
et al.
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
TX
County of Polk
County ofPolk v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45077
N.D. Ohio
al.
(Federal)
TX
County of Red
County of Red River v. Purdue Pharma
1:17-op-45160
N.D. Ohio
River
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
MDL - In re
County of Castro, County of Colorado,
Texas Opioid
County of Jefferson, County gfMadison,
Litigation
County ofRoberts, County of San Saba,
2020-37584 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Roberts
County of Shackelford, County of Terrell,
2018-63587
Judicial
Irving Independent School District and
(master)
District of
Texarkana Independent School District v.

Harris
AbbVie Inc., et al.

County)
State MDL
Rockwall County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1-19-0503 /
TX - 439th.

TX
County of Rockwall
et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
master
District Court
C-247

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
of Rockwall
County
State
TX
County of Rusk
County of Rusk v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1: 1 7-op-45154
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of San
County ofSan Patricio v. Purdue Pharma
2018-77075 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
Patrieio
L.P., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
MDL - In re
County of Castro, County of Colorado,
Texas Opioid
County of Jefferson, County of Madison,
Litigation
County of Roberts, County of San Saba,
2020-37584 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of San Saba
County of Shackelford, County of Terrell,
2018-63587
Judicial
Irving Independent School District and
(master)
District of
Texarkana Independent School District v.

Harris
Abb Vie Inc., et al.

County)
State MDL
MDL - In re
County of Castro, County of Colorado,
Texas Opioid
County of Jefferson, County of Madison,
Litigation
County of
County of Roberts, County of San Saba,
2020-37584 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
Shackelford
County of Shackelford, County of Terrell,
2018-63587
Judicial
Irving Independent School District and
(master)
District of
Texarkana Independent School District v.

Harris
Abb Vie Inc., et al.

County)
State MDL
Socorro Independent School District,
Downey Unified School District, Kern
High School District, Waukegan
MDL - In re
Community Unit School District, Bibb
Texas Opioid
County School District, South Bend
Litigation
Community School Corp., Mesa County
2020-70878 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Smith
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
2018-63587
Judicial
Unified School District, Smith -Green
(master)
District of
Community Schools, School City of
Harris
Mishawaka, City of Mishawaka, IN, City
County)
ofHillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
(State MDL)
KY, and City of Mt. Washington, KY v.

Abb Vie Inc., et al.

TX
County of Stephens
Stephens County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45804
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
TX
County of Tarrant
County of Tarrant v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45274
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
County of Castro, County of Colorado
2020-37584 /
MDL - In re
TX
County of Terrell
County of Jefferson, County of Madison,
2018-63587
Texas Opioid
County of Roberts, County of San Saba,
(master)
Litigation
Countyo Shackel ord, Countyo Terrell,
TX - 152nd
C-248

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Irving Independent School District and
Judicial
Texarkana Independent School District v.

District of
Abb Vie Inc., et al.

Harris
County)
State MDL
TX
County of
County of Throckmorton v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45141
N.D. Ohio
Throckmorton
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
TX
County of Titus
County of Titus v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:17-op-45161
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Travis v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2018-77144 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Travis
et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
TX
County of Upshur
County of Upshur v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 1 7-op-45085
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Uvalde v. Teva
2020-16427 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Uvalde
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL)
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Van
County of Van Zandt v. Purdue Pharma
2018-77150 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
Zandt
L.P., et al.
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL)
TX - 12th
2019-29777 /
Judicial
TX
County of Walker
County of Walker v. Abbott Laboratories,
2018-63587
District Court
et al.
(master)
of Walker
County
State
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Waller v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2018-77153 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Waller
et al
2018-63587
Judicial
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
C-249

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
TX
County of Webb
County of Webb, Texas v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45175
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
TX
County of Wichita
County of Wichita v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45064
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
TX - 368th
Judicial
County of
County of Williamson v. Purdue Pharma
19-0850-C368 /
District Court
TX
Williamson
L.P., et al.
2018-63587
of
(master)
Williamson
County
(State)
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
County of Wilson and Wilson County
2020-39831 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
County of Wilson
Memorial Hospital District v. Teva
2018-63587
Judicial
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
TX
County of Zavala
The County of Zavala, Texas v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-46036
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Dallas County Hospital District d/b/a
Parkland Health & Hospital System; Palo
Pinto County Hospital District a/k/a Palo
Pinto General Hospital; Guadalupe
Valley Hospital a/k/a Guadalupe
Regional Medical Center; VHS San
Antonio Partners, LLC d/b/a Baptist
Medical Center, Mission Trail Baptist
Hospital, North Central Baptist Hospital,
Northeast Baptist Hospital, and St. Luke's
Baptist Hospital; Nacogdoches Medical
Center; Resolute Hospital Comp Any,
LLC d%b/a Resolute Health; The Hospitals
Dallas County
of Providence East Campus; The
TX - 162nd
Hospital District
Hospitals of Providence Memorial
D 635 /
Judicial
TX
d/blaParkland
Campus; The Hospitals of Providence
2018-63587
&635
District Court
Health and Hospital
Sierra Campus; The Hospitals of
(master)
of Dallas
System
Providence Transmountain Campus; VHS
County
Brownsville Hospital Company, LLC
(State)
d%b/a Valley Baptist Medical Center -
Brownsville; VHS Harlingen Hospital
Company, LLC d/b/a Valley Baptist
Medical Center; ARMC, L.P. d/b/a
Abilene Regional Medical Center;
College Station Hospital, LP; Granbury
Hospital Corporation d/b/a Lake
Granbury Medical Center; Navarro
Hospital, L.P. d/b/a Navarro Regional
Hospital; Brownwood Hospital, L.P. d/b/a
Brownwood Regional Medical Center;
Victoria of Texas, L.P. d/b/a Detar
Hospital Navarro and Detar Hospital
C-250

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
North; Laredo Texas Hospital Company,
L.P. d/b/a Laredo Medical Center; San
Angelo Hospital, L.P. d/b/a San Angelo
Community Medical Center; Cedar Park
Health System, L.P. d/b/a Cedar Park
Regional Medical Center; NHCI of
Hillsboro, Inc. d/b/a Hill Regional
Hospital; Longview Medical Center L.P.
d/b/a Longview Regional Medical Center;
and Piney Woods Healthcare System, L.P.
d/b/a Woodland Heights Medical Center
v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC, et al.

Dallas County Hospital District d/b/a
Parkland Health & Hospital System; Palo
Pinto County Hospital District a/k/a Palo
Pinto General Hospital; Guadalupe
Valley Hospital a/k/a Guadalupe
Regional Medical Center; VHS San
Antonio Partners, LLC d/b/a Baptist
Medical Center; Mission Trail Baptist
Hospital, North Central Baptist Hospital,
Northeast Baptist Hospital, and St. Luke's
Baptist Hospital; Nacogdoches Medical
Center; Resolute Hospital Comp Any,
LLC d/b/a Resolute Health; The Hospitals
of Providence East Campus; The
Hospitals of Providence Memorial
Campus; The Hospitals of Providence
Sierra Campus; The Hospitals of
Providence Transmountain Campus; VHS
Brownsville Hospital Company, LLC
TX - 162nd
Guadalupe Valley
d/b/a Valley Baptist Medical Center -
DG19-18635 /
Judicial
TX
Hospital a/k/a
Brownsville; VHS Harlingen Hospital
District Court
Guadalupe Regional
Company, LLC d/b/a Valley Baptist
m s
(master)
of Dallas
Medical Center
Medical Center; ARMC L.P. d/b/a
County
Abilene Regional Medical Center;
(State)
College Station Hospital, LP; Granbury
Hospital Corporation d/b/a Lake
Granbury Medical Center; Navarro
Hospital, L.P. d/b/a Navarro Regional
Hospital; Brownwood Hospital, L.P. d/b/a
Brownwood Regional Medical Center;
Victoria of Texas, L.P. d/b/a Detar
Hospital Navarro and Detar Hospital
North; Laredo Texas Hospital Company,
L.P. d/b/a Laredo Medical Center; San
Angelo Hospital, L.P. d/b/a San Angelo
Community Medical Center; Cedar Park
Health System, L.P. d/b/a Cedar Park
Regional Medical Center; NHCI of
Hillsboro, Inc. d/b/a Hill Regional
Hospital; Longview Medical Center, L.P.
d/b/a Longview Regional Medical Center;
and Piney Woods Healthcare S stem, L.P.

C-251

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
d/b/a Woodland Heights Medical Center
v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC, et al.

MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Harris County
Litigation
Hospital District
Harris County Hospital District d/b/a
2021-23217 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
Harris Health
Harris Health System v. McKesson
2018-63587
Judicial
System
Syst
Corporation, et al.
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
County of Castro, County of Colorado,
County of Jefferson, County of Madison,
County of Roberts, County of San Saba,
County of Shackelford, County of Terrell,
Irving Independent School District and
Texarkana Independent School District v.

AbbVie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
MDL - In re
Independent School Dist., Irving
Texas Opioid
Independent School District, Socorro
Litigation
Independent School District, Downey
2020-37584 /
(TX - 152nd
Irving Independent
Unified School District, Kern High School
2018-63587
Judicial
TX
School District
District, Waukegan Community Unit
(master) / 1:21-
District of
School District, Bibb County School
op-45080
Harris
District, South Bend Community School
County)
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
(State MDL)
District 51, Elk Grove Unified School
/ N.D. Ohio
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
(Federal)
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City ofHillview, KY, City
of Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.

Washington, KY Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.

TX - 365th
Judicial
TX
Maverick County
Maverick County Hospital District v.
17-10-34909-
District Court
Hospital District
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

MCVAJA
of Maverick
County
State
MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Litigation
Nueces County
County of Nueces and Nueces County
2018-77083 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
Hospital District
Hospital District v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
2018-63587
Judicial
et al.
(master)
District of
Harris
County)
State MDL
TX
Ochiltree County
Ochiltree County Hospital District v.
1:18-op-45869
N.D. Ohio
Hospital District
McKesson Corporation, et al.

Federal
C-252

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
Dallas County Hospital District d/b/a
Parkland Health & Hospital System; Palo
Pinto County Hospital District a/k/a Palo
Pinto General Hospital; Guadalupe
Valley Hospital a/k/a Guadalupe
Regional Medical Center; VHS San
Antonio Partners, LLC d/b/a Baptist
Medical Center, Mission Trail Baptist
Hospital, North Central Baptist Hospital,
Northeast Baptist Hospital, and St. Luke's
Baptist Hospital; Nacogdoches Medical
Center; Resolute Hospital Comp Any,
LLC d/b/a Resolute Health; The Hospitals
of Providence East Campus; The
Hospitals of Providence Memorial
Campus; The Hospitals of Providence
Sierra Campus; The Hospitals of
Providence Transmountain Campus; VHS
Brownsville Hospital Company, LLC
dlb/a Valley Baptist Medical Center -
TX - 162nd
Palo Pinto County
Brownsville; VHS Harlingen Hospital
DG19-18635 /
Judicial
TX
Hospital District
Company, LLC d/b/a Valley Baptist
2018-63587
District Court
a/k/a Palo Pinto
Medical Center; ARMC, L.P. d/b/a
(master)
of Dallas
General Hospital
Abilene Regional Medical Center;
County
College Station Hospital, LP; Granbury
(State)
Hospital Corporation d/b/a Lake
Granbury Medical Center; Navarro
Hospital, L.P. d/b/a Navarro Regional
Hospital; Brownwood Hospital, L.P. d/b/a
Brownwood Regional Medical Center;
Victoria of Texas, L.P. d/b/a Detar
Hospital Navarro and Detar Hospital
North; Laredo Texas Hospital Company,
L.P. d/b/a Laredo Medical Center; San
Angelo Hospital, L.P. d/b/a San Angelo
Community Medical Center; Cedar Park
Health System, L.P. dlb/a Cedar Park
Regional Medical Center; NHCI of
Hillsboro, Inc. d/b/a Hill Regional
Hospital; Longview Medical Center, L.P.
d%b/a Longview Regional Medical Center;
and Piney Woods Healthcare System, L.P.
d/b/a Woodland Heights Medical Center
v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals, LLC, et al.

Socorro Independent School District,
MDL - In re
Downey Unified School District, Kern
Texas of
High School District, Waukegan
on
Litigation
Socorro
Community Unit School District, Bibb
202070878 /
(TX - 152nd
TX
Independent School
County School District, South Bend
2018-63587
Judicial
District
Community School Corp., Mesa County
(master) / 1:21-
District of
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
op-45080
Harris
Unified School District, Smith -Green
County)
Community Schools, School City of
MDL)
Mishawaka, Cityof Mishawaka, IN, City(State
C-253

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
of Hillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
/ N.D. Ohio
KY, and City ofMt. Washington, KY v.
(Federal)
AbbVie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
Independent School Dist., Irving
Independent School District, Socorro
Independent School District, Downey
Unified School District, Kern High School
District, Waukegan Community Unit
School District, Bibb County School
District, South Bend Community School
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
District 51, Elk Grove Unified School
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City of Hillview, KY, City
of Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.

Washington, KY, Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.

Tarrant County
Hospital District
Tarrant County Hospital District d/b/a
N.D. Ohio
TX
d/b/a JPS Health
.IPS Health Network v. McKesson
1:21-op-45077
(Federal)
Network
Corporation, et al.

County of Castro, County of Colorado,
County of Jefferson, County of Madison,
County of Roberts, County of San Saba,
County of Shackelford, County of Terrell,
Irving Independent School District and
Texarkana Independent School District v.

Abb Vie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
MDL - In re
Independent School Dist., Irving
Texas Opioid
Independent School District, Socorro
Litigation
Independent School District, Downey
20-6587 /
(TX - 152nd
Texarkana
Unified School District, Kern High School
201&358
Judicial
TX
Independent School
District, Waukegan Community Unit
(master) / 1:21-
District of
District
School District, Bibb County School
op-45080
Harris
District, South Bend Community School
County)
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
(State MDL)
District 51, Elk Grove Unified School
/ N.D. Ohio
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
(Federal)
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City of Hillview, KY, City
of Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.

Washington, KY, Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.

MDL - In re
Texas Opioid
Wilson County
County of Wilson and Wilson County
2020-39831 /
Litigation
TX
Memorial Hospital
Memorial Hospital District v. Teva
2018-63587
(TX - 152nd
District
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(master)
Judicial
District of
Harris
C-254

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
County)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Washington County, Kane County, Beaver
190500179 /
(UT -
UT
County of Beaver
County and Garfield County, Utah v.
180500119
Summit
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Cache County, Utah and Rich County,
190500360 /
(UT -
UT
County of Cache
Utah v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
180500119
Summit
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
UT
County of Carbon
Carbon County, Utah v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-46270
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Uintah County, Utah; Duchesne County,
190500359 /
Litigation I
(UT -
UT
County of Daggett
Utah; Daggett County, Utah and Tri-
180500119
Summit
County Health Department v. Purdue
(coordinated)
County,
Pharma L.P., et al.

Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL)
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Davis County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
180700870 /
(UT -
UT
County of Davis
al
180500119
Summit
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
Uintah County, Utah; Duchesne County,
190500359 /
MDL - In the
Matter of the
UT
County of Duchesne
Utah; Daggett County, Utah and Tri-
180500119
Utah Opioid
County Health Department v. Purdue
(coordinated)
Litigation I
Pharma L.P., et al.

UT -
C-255

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Summit
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Sevier County, Juab County, Emery
190500430 /
(UT -
UT
County of Emery
County, Wayne County and Piute County
180500119
Summit
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Washington County, Kane County, Beaver
190500361 /
(UT -
UT
County of Garfield
County and Garfield County, Utah v.
180500119
Summit
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Grand County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
180700040 /
(UT -
UT
County of Grand
al
180500119
Summit
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL)
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
180500149 /
(UT -
UT
County of Iron
Iron County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
180500119
Summit
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
Sevier County, Juab County, Emery
190500430 /
MDL - In the
Matter of the
UT
County of Juab
County, Wayne County and Piute County
180500119
Utah Opioid
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
Litigation I
C-256

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
(UT -
Summit
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Washington County, Kane County, Beaver
190500361 /
(UT -
UT
County of Kane
County and Garfield County, Utah v.
180500119
Summit
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Millard County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
180700044 /
(UT -
UT
County of Millard
al
180500119
Summit
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Sevier County, Juab County, Emery
190500430 /
(UT -
UT
County of Piute
County, Wayne County and Piute County
180500119
Summit
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Cache County, Utah and Rich County,
190500360 /
(UT -
UT
County of Rich
Utah v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
180500119
Summit
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
Salt Lake County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
180902421 /
MDL - In the
UT
County of Salt Lake
et al.
180500119
Matter of the
(coordinated)
Utah Opioid
C-257

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Litigation I
(UT -
Summit
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
San Juan County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
180700011 /
(UT -
UT
County of San Juan
et al.
180500119
Summit
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Sanpete County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
180600095 /
(UT -
UT
County of Sanpete
et al.
180500119
Summit
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Sevier County, Juab County, Emery
190500430 /
(UT -
UT
County of Sevier
County, Wayne County and Piute County
180500119
Summit
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Summit County Utah v. Purdue Pharma
190500354 /
(UT -
UT
County of Summit
L.P., et al.
180500119
Summit
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
C-258

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Tooele County, Utah v. Purdue Pharma
190500355 /
(UT -
UT
County of Tooele
L.P., et al.
180500119
Summit
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Uintah County, Utah; Duchesne County,
190500359 /
Litigation I
(UT -
UT
County of Uintah
Utah; Daggett County, Utah and Tri-
180500119
Summit
County Health Department v. Purdue
(coordinated)
County,
Pharma L.P., et al.

Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
UT
County of Utah
Utah County, Utah v. Purdue Pharma,
1:18-op-46184
N.D. Ohio
Inc., et al.

Federal
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Wasatch County, Utah v. Purdue Pharma
190500357 /
(UT -
UT
County of Wasatch
L.P., et al.
180500119
Summit
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL)
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
County of
Washington County, Kane County, Beaver
190500361 /
(UT -
UT
Washington
County and Garfield County, Utah v.
180500119
Summit
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Sevier County, Juab County, Emery
190500430 /
oid
Utah Lion
Litigation I
UT
County of Wayne
County, Wayne County and Piute County
180500119
(UT -
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(coordinated)
Summit
County,
Silver
C-259

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Summit
Division)
State MDL
MDL - In the
Matter of the
Utah Opioid
Litigation I
Weber County, Utah v. Purdue Pharma
190500358 /
(UT -
UT
County of Weber
L.P., et al.
180500119
Summit
(coordinated)
County,
Silver
Summit
Division)
State MDL
VA
City of Alexandria
City of Alexandria v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45246
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
City of Bristol
City of Bristol, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45719
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
City of Buena Vista
City of Buena Vista, Virginia v. Teva
1:20-op-45159
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
VA
City of Chesapeake
City of Chesapeake, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45712
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.,
Federal
VA
City of Covington
City of Covington, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45799
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
City of Danville, Virginia v.

N.D. Ohio
VA
City of Danville
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45730
(Federal)
al.

VA
City of Emporia
City of Emporia, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-46850
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
VA
City of Fairfax
City of Fairfax, Virginia v. Teva
1:20-op-45177
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
VA
City of
City of Fredericksburg, Virginia v.
1:19-op-45898
N.D. Ohio
FredericksburgPurdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
VA
City of Galax
City of Galax, Virginia v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45243
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
VA
City of Hopewell
City of Hopewell, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45433
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
VA
City of Lexington
City of Lexington, Virginia v. Purdue
1:1.9-op-45693
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA - Circuit
City of Martinsville, Virginia v. Purdue
Court for the
VA
City of Martinsville
Pharma L.P., et al.

CL18000240
City of
Martinsville
State
City of Norfolk, Virginia v.

N.D. Ohio
VA
City of Norfolk
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45926
(Federal)
al.

VA
City of Norton
City of Norton, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45249
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
City of Portsmouth
City of Portsmouth v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45856
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
City of Radford
City of Radford, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-46154
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
C-260

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
VA
City of Richmond
City of Richmond v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45546
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.

Federal
VA
City of Roanoke
City of Roanoke, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45696
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
City of Salem
City of Salem, Virginia v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45697
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
City of Virginia Beach and Sheriff of the
VA
City of Virginia
City of Virginia Beach v.
1:18-op-46137
N.D. Ohio
Beach
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.

VA
City of Waynesboro
The City of Waynesboro, Virginia v.
1:19-op-46152
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
City of Winchester
City of Winchester, Virginia v. Teva
1:20-op-45176
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
VA
County of
Accomack County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45715
N.D. Ohio
Accomack
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of
Alleghany County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45700
N.D. Ohio
Alle han
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of Amherst
Amherst County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:20-op-45046
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of Arlington
The County Board of Arlington County,
1:21-op-45078
N.D. Ohio
Count Board
Virginia v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Bland County, Virginia v.

N.D. Ohio
VA
County of Bland
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-46065
(Federal)
al.

VA
County of Botetourt
Botetourt County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:20-op-45064
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of Buchanan
Buchanan County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:1.9-op-45253
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Carroll County, Virginia v.

N.D. Ohio
VA
County of Carroll
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46068
(Federal)
al.

VA
County of Charlotte
Charlotte County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45851
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
VA
County of
Chesterfield County, Virginia v. Teva
1:20-op-45173
N.D. Ohio
Chesterfield
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
VA
County of Culpeper
Culpeper County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45849
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
VA
County of
Cumberland County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-46153
N.D. Ohio
Cumberland
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
VA
County of
Dickenson County v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45252
N.D. Ohio
Dickenson
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
VA
County of
Dinwiddie County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:20-op-45291
N.D. Ohio
Dinwiddie
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
County of Fairfax
Fairfax County, Virginia, by its Board of
N.D. Ohio
VA
(Board of
Supervisors v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:19-op-45766
(Federal)
Supervisors)
VA
County of Fauquier
Fauquier County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45686
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of Floyd
Floyd County, Virginia v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45698
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of Franklin
Franklin County, Virginia v. Purdue
1: 1 9-op-45701
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
C-261

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
VA
County of Frederick
Frederick County, Virginia v. Teva
1:20-op-45233
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
VA
County of Giles
Giles County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45236
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
VA
County of
Goochland County, Virginia v. Teva
1:20-op-45175
N.D. Ohio
Goochland
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
Grayson County, Virginia v.

N.D. Ohio
VA
County of Grayson
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-46069
(Federal)
al.

VA
County of
Greenville County v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45848
N.D. Ohio
Greensville
L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of Halifax
Halifax County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45692
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of Henrico
Henrico County, Virginia v. Teva
1:20-op-45172
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
VA
County of Henry
Henry County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45245
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of Isle of
Isle of Wight County, Virginia v. Teva
1:20-op-45145
N.D. Ohio
Wight
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
VA
County of King and
King and Queen County, Virginia v. Teva
1:20-op-45138
N.D. Ohio
Queen
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
VA
County of Lee
Lee County, Virginia v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45251
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of Loudoun
Loudoun County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45842
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of Louisa
Louisa County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45720
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of Madison
Madison County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:1.9-op-45702
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of
Mecklenburg County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:20-op-45174
N.D. Ohio
Mecklenburg
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of
Montgomery County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45234
N.D. Ohio
Montgomery
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of
Northampton County, Virginia v. Teva
1:20-op-45144
N.D. Ohio
Northampton
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
VA
County of
Northumberland County, Virginia v.
1:19-op-45688
N.D. Ohio
Northumberland
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
VA
County of Page
Page County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45275
N.D. Ohio
al.
(Federal)
VA
County of Patrick
Patrick County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-46149
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
VA
County of
Pittsylvania v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:19-op-45247
N.D. Ohio
Pitts lvania
(Federal)
VA
County of Prince
Prince George County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45929
N.D. Ohio
George
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
County of Prince
The Board of County Supervisor of Prince
N.D. Ohio
VA
William (Board of
William County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45687
(Federal)
County Supervisors)
et al.

Pulaski County, Virginia v.

N.D. Ohio
VA
County of Pulaski
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46076
(Federal)
al.

VA
County of
City ofRichmond v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 9-op-45546
N.D. Ohio
Richmond
Drug Corporation, et al.

Federal
C-262

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
VA
County of Roanoke
Roanoke County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45695
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
VA
County of
Rockbridge County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45694
N.D. Ohio
Rockbrid e
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Russell County, Virginia v.

N.D. Ohio
VA
County of Russell
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-46073
(Federal)
al.

County of Scott
Scott County Board of Supervisors v.

N.D. Ohio
VA
(Board of
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-46074
(Federal)
Supervisors)
al.

VA
County of
Shenandoah County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-46150
N.D. Ohio
Shenandoah
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Smyth County, Virginia v.

N.D. Ohio
VA
County of Smyth
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46077
(Federal)
al.

VA
County of Stafford
Stafford County, Virginia v. Teva
1:20-op-45178
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
Tazewell County, Virginia v.

N.D. Ohio
VA
County of Tazewell
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46167
(Federal)
al.

Westmoreland County, Virginia;
VA
County of Warren
Richmond County, Virginia; Warren
1:19-op-45993
N.D. Ohio
County, Virginia v. McKesson
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.

VA
County of
Washington County, Virginia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45254
N.D. Ohio
Washington
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Westmoreland County, Virginia;
VA
County of
Richmond County, Virginia; Warren
1:19-op-45993
N.D. Ohio
Westmoreland
County, Virginia v. McKesson
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.

VA
County of Wise
(Board of
Wise County Board of Supervisors v.
1:19-op-45907
N.D. Ohio
Supervisors)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Wythe County, Virginia v.

N.D. Ohio
VA
County of Wythe
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46072
(Federal)
al.

City of Virginia Beach and Sheriff of the
VA
Sheriff of Virginia
City of Virginia Beach v.
1:l 8-op-46137
N.D. Ohio
Beach City
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.

VA
Town of Richlands
The Town of Richlands, Virginia v. Teva
1:20-op-45193
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
VT
City of St. Albans
City of St, Albans, Vermont v. Purdue
1:19-op-45721
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
City ofAnacortes and Sedro- Woolley
N.D. Ohio
WA
City of Anacortes
School District v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45029
(Federal)
al.

WA
City of Bainbridge
City of Bainbridge Island v. Purdue
1:19-op-45981
N.D. Ohio
Island
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
Skagit County, City of Mount Vernon,
N.D. Ohio
WA
City of Burlington
City of Sedro-Woolley, City of Burlington,
1:18-op-45173
(Federal)
LA Conner School District and Mount
C-263

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Vernon School District v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.

WA
City of Everett
City of Everett v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:17-op-45046
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
WA
City of Kent
City of Kent v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1: 1 8-op-45590
N.D. Ohio
Federal
WA
City of Kirkland
City of Kirkland v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45121
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
WA
City of Lakewood
City of Lakewood v. Purdue Pharma, Inc.,
1:19-op-45221
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
Skagit County, City of Mount Vernon,
City of Mount
City of Sedro-Woolley, City of Burlington,
N.D. Ohio
WA
Vernon
LA Conner School District and Mount
1:18-op-45173
(Federal)
Vernon School District v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.

WA
City of Olympia
City of Olympia v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-46021
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
WA - King
WA
City of Seattle
City of Seattle v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
17-2-25504-
County
al.
1 SEA
Superior
Court State
Skagit County, City of Mount Vernon,
City of Sedro-
City of Sedro-Woolley, City of Burlington,
N.D. Ohio
WA
Woolley
LA Conner School District and Mount
1:18-op-45173
(Federal)
Vernon School District v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.

WA
City of Spokane
City of Spokane v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:19-op-46092
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
WA
City of Tacoma
City of Tacoma v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:17-op-45047
N.D. Ohio
al.
(Federal)
WA
City of Vancouver
City of Vancouver v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45908
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
WA
County of Chelan
Chelan County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-46139
N.D. Ohio
al.
(Federal)
WA
County of Clallam
Clallam County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45612
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
WA
County of Clark
Clark County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45410
N.D. Ohio
al.
(Federal)
WA
County of Franklin
Franklin County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45944
N.D. Ohio
et al
Federal
WA
County of Island
Island County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45982
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
WA
County of Jefferson
Jefferson County v. Purdue Pharma, Inc.,
1:18-op-46023
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
WA
County of King
King County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45231
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
WA
County of Kitsap
Kitsap County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45956
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
WA
County of Kittitas
Kittitas County v. Purdue Pharma, Inc., et
1:18-op-46008
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
WA
County of Lewis
Lewis County, Washington v. Purdue
1:18-op-46301
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
C-264

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
WA
County of Lincoln
Lincoln County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45962
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
WA
County of Pierce
Pierce County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45195
N.D. Ohio
al
Federal
WA
County of San Juan
San Juan County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 1 8-op-46291
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
Skagit County, City of Mount Vernon,
City of Sedro-Woolley, City of Burlington,
N.D. Ohio
WA
County of Skagit
LA Conner School District and Mount
1:18-op-45173
(Federal)
Vernon School District v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.

WA
County of
Snohomish County v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45370
N.D. Ohio
Snohomish
L.P., et al.

Federal
WA
County of Spokane
Spokane County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45943
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
WA
County of Thurston
Thurston County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45409
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
WA
County of Walla
Walla Walla County v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-46010
N.D. Ohio
Walla
L.P., et al.

Federal
WA
County of Whatcom
Whatcom County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45954
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
WA
County of Whitman
Whitman County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-46009
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
Skagit County, City of Mount Vernon,
La Conner School
City of Sedro-Woolley, City of Burlington,
N.D. Ohio
WA
District
La Conner School District and Mount
1:18-op-45173
(Federal)
Vernon School District v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.

Skagit County, City of Mount Vernon,
Mount Vernon
City of Sedro-Woolley, City of Burlington,
N.D. Ohio
WA
School District
La Conner School District and Mount
1:18-op-45173
(Federal)
Vernon School District v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.

Sedro-Woolley
City ofAnacortes and Sedro-Woolley
N.D. Ohio
WA
School District
School District v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45029
(Federal)
al
WI
City of Cudahy
The City of Cudahy v. Actavis Pharma,
1:21-op-45097
N.D. Ohio
Inc., et al.
(Federal)
WI
City of Franklin
The City of Franklin v. Actavis Pharma,
1:21-op-45101
N.D. Ohio
Inc., et al.

Federal
WI
City of Greenfield
The City of Greenfield v. Actavis Pharma,
1:21-op-45102
N.D. Ohio
Inc., et al.

Federal
WI
City of Kenosha
City of Kenosha, Wisconsin v. Teva
1:20-op-45011
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
WI
City of Marinette
City of Marinette v. Teva
1:19-op-46181
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
WI
City of Milwaukee
City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin v. Teva
1:20-op-45044
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
WI
City of Oak Creek
The City of Oak Creek v. Actavis Pharma,
1:21-op-45103
N.D. Ohio
Inc., et al.

Federal
W1
City of South
City of South Milwaukee v. Actavis
2021CV002934
WI - Circuit
Court of
Milwaukee
Pharma, Inc., et al.

Milwaukee
C-265

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
County
(State)
WI
City of Superior
City of Superior v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45331
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
WI
City of Wauwatosa
The City of Wauwatosa v. Actavis
1:21-op-45104
N.D. Ohio
Pharma, Inc., et al.

Federal
WI
City of West Allis
The City of West Allis v. Actavis Pharma,
1:21-op-45105
N.D. Ohio
Inc., et al.

Federal
WI
County of Adams
Adams County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1: 1 7-op-45093
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
WI
County of Ashland
Ashland County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45130
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
Barron County, La Crosse County,
N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Barron
Lafayette County and Menominee County
1: 1 8-op-45277
(Federal)
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

WI
County of Bayfield
Bayfzeld County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45168
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
Brown County, Crawford County, Iron
WI
County of Brown
County, Juneau County, Kewaunee
1:18-op-45117
N.D. Ohio
County, Outagamie County, v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.

WI
County of Buffalo
Buffalo County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:17-op-45141
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
WI
County of Burnett
Burnett County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:17-op-45131
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
WI
County of Calumet
Calumet County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45142
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
WI
County of Chippewa
Chippewa County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:1.7-op-45132
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
WI
County of Clark
Clark County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:17-op-45150
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
WI
County of Columbia
Columbia County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45118
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
Brown County, Crawford County, Iron
WI
County of Crawford
County, Juneau County, Kewaunee
1:18-op-45117
N.D. Ohio
County, Outagamie County, v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.

Dane County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Dane
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45802
(Federal)
al.

WI
County of Dodge
Dodge County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:17-op-45143
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
WI
County of Door
Door County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:17-op-45104
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
WI
County of Douglas
Douglas County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45107
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
WI
County of Dunn
Dunn County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:17-op-45133
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
W1
County of Eau
Eau Claire County v. Purdue Pharma
1:17-op-45112
N.D. Ohio
Claire
L.P., et al.

Federal
WI
County of Florence
Florence County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 1 7-op-45125
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
C-266

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
WI
County of Fond du
Fond du Lac County v. Purdue Pharma
1:17-op-45106
N.D. Ohio
Lac
L.P., et al.

Federal
WI
County of Forest
Forest County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:17-op-45134
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
WI
County of Grant
Grant County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:17-op-45115
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
WI
County of Green
Green County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1: 1 7-op-45096
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
County of Green
Green Lake County, Taylor County and
N.D. Ohio
W1
Lake
yilas County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1: 1 8-op-45832
(Federal)
al.

WI
County of Iowa
Iowa County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1: 1 7-op-45099
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
Brown County, Crawford County, Iron
WI
County of Iron
County, Juneau County, Kewaunee
1:18-op-45117
N.D. Ohio
County, Outagamie County, v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.

WI
County of Jackson
Jackson County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45121
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
WI
County of Jefferson
Jefferson County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45122
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
Brown County, Crawford County, Iron
WI
County of Juneau
County, Juneau County, Kewaunee
1:18-op-45117
N.D. Ohio
County, Outagamie County, v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.

WI
County of Kenosha
Kenosha County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 1 7-op-45144
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
Brown County, Crawford County, Iron
W1
County of
County, Juneau County, Kewaunee
1:1.8-op-45117
N.D. Ohio
Kewaunee
County, Outagamie County, v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.

Barron County, La Crosse County,
N.D. Ohio
WI
County of LaCrosse
Lafayette County and Menominee County
1:18-op-45277
(Federal)
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

Barron County, La Crosse County,
N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Lafayette
Lafayette County and Menominee County
1:18-op-45277
(Federal)
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

WI
County of Langlade
Langlade County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45124
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
WI
County of Lincoln
Lincoln County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:17-op-45167
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
County of
Manitowoc County v. Purdue Pharma
1:17-op-45135
N.D. Ohio
Manitowoc
L.P., et al.

Federal
WI
County of Marathon
Marathon County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45095
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
WI
County of Marinette
Marinette County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45145
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
W1
County of
Marquette County v. Purdue Pharma
1:17-op-45136
N.D. Ohio
Marquette
L.P., et al.

Federal
County of
Barron County, La Crosse County,
N.D. Ohio
W1
Menominee
Lafayette County and Menominee County
1:18-op-45277
(Federal)
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.

C-267

State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
County of
Milwaukee County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
Milwaukee
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45402
(Federal)
Monroe County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Monroe
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 7-op-45146
(Federal)
al.

Oconto County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Oconto
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 7-op-45120
(Federal)
al.

Oneida County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Oneida
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 7-op-45129
(Federal)
al.

Brown County, Crawford County, Iron
Wl
County of
County, Juneau County, Kewaunee
1:18-op-45117
N.D. Ohio
Outagamie
County, Outagamie County, v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.

Pierce County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Pierce
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:17-op-45165
(Federal)
al.

Price County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Price
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 7-op-45126
(Federal)
al.

WI
County of Rock
Rock County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:17-op-45108
N.D. Ohio
al.

Federal
Rusk County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Rusk
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:17-op-45116
(Federal)
al.

Sauk County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Sauk
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:17-op-45098
(Federal)
al.

Sawyer County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Sawyer
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:17-op-45137
(Federal)
al.

Shawano County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Shawano
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:17-op-45119
(Federal)
al.

County of
Sheboygan County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
Wl
Sheboygan
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.7-op-45128
(Federal)
WI
County of St. Croix
St. Croix County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45147
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
Green Lake County, Taylor County and
N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Taylor
Vilas County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45832
(Federal)
al.

WI
County of
Trempealeau County v. Purdue Pharma
1:17-op-45138
N.D. Ohio
Trem ealeau
L.P., et al.

Federal
Vernon County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Vernon
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:17-op-45148
(Federal)
al.

Green Lake County, Taylor County and
N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Vilas
Vilas County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45832
(Federal)
al.

C-268

State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.

Jurisdiction
District
Walworth County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Walworth
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45988
(Federal)
al.

County of
Washburn County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
Wt
Washburn
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 7-op-45123
(Federal)
County of
Washington County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
W1
Washington
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:17-op-45114
(Federal)
County of
Waukesha County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
W1
Waukesha
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45978
(Federal)
Waupaca County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Waupaca
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:17-op-45166
(Federal)
al.

Waushara County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Waushara
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:17-op-45139
(Federal)
al.

Wood County, Wisconsin v.

N.D. Ohio
WI
County of Wood
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 7-op-45127
(Federal)
al.

Village of Pleasant
Village of Pleasant Prairie, Wisconsin v.
1:20-op-45010
N.D. Ohio
Prairie
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.

Federal
Wt - Circuit
Village of
The Village of Sturtevant v. Actavis
Court of
WI
Sturtevant
Pharma, Inc. f/k/a Watson Pharma, Inc.,
2021CV000999
Racine
et al.

County
State
WY
City of Casper
City of Casper, Wyoming v. Purdue
1:19-op-45079
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
WY
City of Cheyenne
City of Cheyenne v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45280
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
WY
City of Green River
City of Green River Wyoming v. Purdue
1:19-o-45764
p
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
WY
City of Riverton
City of Riverton, Wyoming v. Purdue
1:19-op-45558
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
WY
City of Rock
City of Rock Springs, Wyoming v. Purdue
1:19-op-45265
N.D. Ohio
Springs
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
WY
County of Carbon
County of Carbon v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:1.8-op-45625
N.D. Ohio
et al.

Federal
WY
County of
Sweetwater County, Wyoming v. Purdue
1:19-op-45031
N.D. Ohio
Sweetwater
Pharma L.P., et al.

Federal
C-269

EXHIBIT D
[Intentionally Omitted]
D-1

EXHIBIT E
List of Opioid Remediation Uses
Schedule A
Core Strategies
Settling States and Exhibit G Participants may choose from among the abatement strategies listed in Schedule B. However, priority may be given to the following core abatement strategies ("Core Strategies").1
•. NALOXONE 1' OTHER FDA -APPROVED DRUG TO REVERSE 1' 1 1

OVERDOSES

1. Expand training for first responders, schools, community support groups and families; and

2. Increase distribution to individuals who are uninsured or whose insurance does not cover the needed service.

B. MEDICATION -ASSISTED TREATMENT ("MAT") DISTRIBUTION AND

OTHER OPIOID-RELATED TREATMENT

1. Increase distribution of MAT to individuals who are uninsured or whose insurance does not cover the needed service;

2. Provide education to school -based and youth -focused programs that discourage or prevent misuse;

3. Provide MAT education and awareness training to healthcare providers, EMTs, law enforcement, and other first responders; and

4. Provide treatment and recovery support services such as residential and inpatient treatment, intensive outpatient treatment, outpatient therapy or counseling, and recovery housing that allow or integrate medication and with other support services.

C. PREGNANT & POSTPARTUM WOMEN

1. Expand Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment ("SBIRT') services to non -Medicaid eligible or uninsured pregnant women;

2. Expand comprehensive evidence -based treatment and recovery services, including MAT, for women with co-occurring Opioid Use Disorder ("OUD") and other i As used in this Schedule A, words like "expand," "fund," "provide" or the like shall not indicate a preference for new or existing programs.

E-1

Substance Use Disorder ("SUD")/Mental Health disorders for uninsured individuals for up to 12 months postpartum; and

3. Provide comprehensive wrap -around services to individuals with OUD, including housing, transportation, job placement/training, and childcare.

D. EXPANDING TREATMENT FOR NEONATAL ABSTINENCE SYNDROME ( NAS„)

1. Expand comprehensive evidence -based and recovery support for NAS babies;

2. Expand services for better continuum of care with infant -need dyad; and

3. Expand long-term treatment and services for medical monitoring of NAS babies and their families.

E. EXPANSION OF WARM HAND-OFF PROGRAMS AND RECOVERY SERVICES

1. Expand services such as navigators and on -call teams to begin MAT in hospital emergency departments;

2. Expand warm hand-off services to transition to recovery services;

3. Broaden scope of recovery services to include co-occurring SUD or mental health conditions;

4. Provide comprehensive wrap -around services to individuals in recovery, including housing, transportation, job placement/training, and childcare; and

5. Hire additional social workers or other behavioral health workers to facilitate expansions above.

F. TREATMENT O.INCARCERATEDPOPULATION

1. Provide evidence -based treatment and recovery support, including MAT for persons with OUD and co-occurring SUD/MH disorders within and transitioning out of the criminal justice system; and

2. Increase funding for jails to provide treatment to inmates with OUD. l . Funding for media campaigns to prevent opioid use (similar to the FDA's "Real Cost" campaign to prevent youth from misusing tobacco); E-2

2. Funding for evidence -based prevention programs in schools;

3. Funding for medical provider education and outreach regarding best prescribing practices for opioids consistent with CDC guidelines, including providers at hospitals (academic detailing);

4. Funding for community drug disposal programs; and

5. Funding and training for first responders to participate in pre -arrest diversion programs, post -overdose response teams, or similar strategies that connect at -risk individuals to behavioral health services and supports.

H. EXPANDING SYRINGE SERVICE PROGRAMS

1. Provide comprehensive syringe services programs with more wrap -around services, including linkage to OUD treatment, access to sterile syringes and linkage to care and treatment of infectious diseases.

I. EVIDENCE -BASED DATA COLLECTION AND RESEARCH ANALYZING THE

EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ABATEMENT STRATEGIES WITHIN THE STATE E-3

Schedule B
Approved Uses
Support treatment of Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) and any co-occurring Substance Use Disorder or Mental Health (SUD/MH) conditions through evidence -based or evidence -informed programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following:

PART ONE: TREATMENT
A. TREAT OPIOID USE DISORDER (OUD)
Support treatment of Opioid Use Disorder ("OUD") and any co-occurring Substance Use Disorder or Mental Health ("SUD/MH") conditions through evidence -based or evidence -informed programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, those that :2

1. Expand availability of treatment for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including all forms of Medication -Assisted Treatment ("MAT') approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

2. Support and reimburse evidence -based services that adhere to the American Society of Addiction Medicine ("ASAM") continuum of care for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.

3. Expand telehealth to increase access to treatment for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including MAT, as well as counseling, psychiatric support, and other treatment and recovery support services.

4. Improve oversight of Opioid Treatment Programs ("OTPs") to assure evidence - based or evidence -informed practices such as adequate methadone dosing and low threshold approaches to treatment.

5. Support mobile intervention, treatment, and recovery services, offered by qualified professionals and service providers, such as peer recovery coaches, for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions and for persons who have experienced an opioid overdose.

6. Provide treatment of trauma for individuals with OUD (e.g., violence, sexual assault, human trafficking, or adverse childhood experiences) and family members (e.g., surviving family members after an overdose or overdose fatality), and training of health care personnel to identify and address such trauma. 2 As used in this Schedule B, words like "expand," "fund," "provide" or the like shall not indicate a preference for new or existing programs.

E-4

7. Support evidence -based withdrawal management services for people with OUD and any co-occurring mental health conditions.

8. Provide training on MAT for health care providers, first responders, students, or other supporting professionals, such as peer recovery coaches or recovery outreach specialists, including telementoring to assist community -based providers in rural or underserved areas.

9. Support workforce development for addiction professionals who work with persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.

10. Offer fellowships for addiction medicine specialists for direct patient care, instructors, and clinical research for treatments.

11. Offer scholarships and supports for behavioral health practitioners or workers involved in addressing OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH or mental health conditions, including, but not limited to, training, scholarships, fellowships, loan repayment programs, or other incentives for providers to work in rural or underserved areas.

12. Provide funding and training for clinicians to obtain a waiver under the federal Drug Addiction Treatment Act of 2000 ("DATA 2000") to prescribe MAT for OUD, and provide technical assistance and professional support to clinicians who have obtained a DATA 2000 waiver.

13. Disseminate web -based training curricula, such as the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry's Provider Clinical Support Service—Opioids web -based training curriculum and motivational interviewing.

14. Develop and disseminate new curricula, such as the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry's Provider Clinical Support Service for Medication —Assisted Treatment.

B. SUPPORT PEOPLE IN TREATMENT AND RECOVERY
Support people in recovery from OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions through evidence -based or evidence -informed programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the programs or strategies that:

1. Provide comprehensive wrap -around services to individuals with OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH conditions, including housing, transportation, education, job placement, job training, or childcare.

2. Provide the full continuum of care of treatment and recovery services for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including supportive housing, peer support services and counseling, community navigators, case management, and connections to community -based services.
lW

3. Provide counseling, peer -support, recovery case management and residential treatment with access to medications for those who need it to persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.

4. Provide access to housing for people with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including supportive housing, recovery housing, housing assistance programs, training for housing providers, or recovery housing programs that allow or integrate FDA -approved mediation with other support services.

5. Provide community support services, including social and legal services, to assist in deinstitutionalizing persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.

6. Support or expand peer -recovery centers, which may include support groups, social events, computer access, or other services for persons with OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH conditions.

7. Provide or support transportation to treatment or recovery programs or services for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.

8. Provide employment training or educational services for persons in treatment for or recovery from OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.

9. Identify successful recovery programs such as physician, pilot, and college recovery programs, and provide support and technical assistance to increase the number and capacity of high -quality programs to help those in recovery.

10. Engage non -profits, faith -based communities, and community coalitions to support people in treatment and recovery and to support family members in their efforts to support the person with OUD in the family.

11. Provide training and development of procedures for government staff to appropriately interact and provide social and other services to individuals with or in recovery from OUD, including reducing stigma.

12. Support stigma reduction efforts regarding treatment and support for persons with OUD, including reducing the stigma on effective treatment.

13. Create or support culturally appropriate services and programs for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including new Americans.

1.4. Create and/or support recovery high schools.

1.5. Hire or train behavioral health workers to provide or expand any of the services or supports listed above.

E-6

C. CONNECT PEOPLE WHO NEED HELP TO THE HELP THEY NEED
(CONNECTIONS TO CARE)
Provide connections to care for people who have —or are at risk of developing—OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH conditions through evidence -based or evidence -informed programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, those that:

1. Ensure that health care providers are screening for OUD and other risk factors and know how to appropriately counsel and treat (or refer if necessary) a patient for OUD treatment.

2. Fund SBIRT programs to reduce the transition from use to disorders, including SBIRT services to pregnant women who are uninsured or not eligible for Medicaid.

3. Provide training and long-term implementation of SBIRT in key systems (health, schools, colleges, criminal justice, and probation), with a focus on youth and young adults when transition from misuse to opioid disorder is common.

4. Purchase automated versions of SBIRT and support ongoing costs of the technology.

5. Expand services such as navigators and on -call teams to begin MAT in hospital emergency departments.

6. Provide training for emergency room personnel treating opioid overdose patients on post -discharge planning, including community referrals for MAT, recovery case management or support services.

7. Support hospital programs that transition persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, or persons who have experienced an opioid overdose, into clinically appropriate follow-up care through a bridge clinic or similar approach.

8. Support crisis stabilization centers that serve as an alternative to hospital emergency departments for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions or persons that have experienced an opioid overdose.

9. Support the work of Emergency Medical Systems, including peer support specialists, to connect individuals to treatment or other appropriate services following an opioid overdose or other opioid-related adverse event.

1.0. Provide funding for peer support specialists or recovery coaches in emergency departments, detox facilities, recovery centers, recovery housing, or similar settings; offer services, supports, or connections to care to persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions or to persons who have experienced an opioid overdose.

E-7

11. Expand warm hand-off services to transition to recovery services.

12. Create or support school -based contacts that parents can engage with to seek immediate treatment services for their child; and support prevention, intervention, treatment, and recovery programs focused on young people.

13. Develop and support best practices on addressing OUD in the workplace.

14. Support assistance programs for health care providers with OUD.

15. Engage non -profits and the faith community as a system to support outreach for treatment.

16. Support centralized call centers that provide information and connections to appropriate services and supports for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.

D. ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE -INVOLVED PERSONS Address the needs of persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions who are involved in, are at risk of becoming involved in, or are transitioning out of the criminal justice system through evidence -based or evidence -informed programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, those that:

1. Support pre -arrest or pre -arraignment diversion and deflection strategies for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including established strategies such as:
a. Self -referral strategies such as the Angel Programs or the Police Assisted Addiction Recovery Initiative ("PAARI" );
b. Active outreach strategies such as the Drug Abuse Response Team ("DART") model;
C. "Naloxone Plus" strategies, which work to ensure that individuals who have received naloxone to reverse the effects of an overdose are then linked to treatment programs or other appropriate services;
d. Officer prevention strategies, such as the Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion ("LEAD") model;
C. Officer intervention strategies such as the Leon County, Florida Adult Civil Citation Network or the Chicago Westside Narcotics Diversion to Treatment Initiative; or
f. Co -responder and/or alternative responder models to address OUD-related 911 calls with greater SUD expertise.

IMM

2. Support pre-trial services that connect individuals with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions to evidence -informed treatment, including MAT, and related services.

3. Support treatment and recovery courts that provide evidence -based options for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.

4. Provide evidence -informed treatment, including MAT, recovery support, harm reduction, or other appropriate services to individuals with OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH conditions who are incarcerated in jail or prison.

5. Provide evidence -informed treatment, including MAT, recovery support, harm reduction, or other appropriate services to individuals with OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH conditions who are leaving jail or prison or have recently left jail or prison, are on probation or parole, are under community corrections supervision, or are in re-entry programs or facilities.

6. Support critical time interventions ("CTI" ), particularly for individuals living with dual -diagnosis OUD/serious mental illness, and services for individuals who face immediate risks and service needs and risks upon release from correctional settings.

7. Provide training on best practices for addressing the needs of criminal justice - involved persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions to law enforcement, correctional, or judicial personnel or to providers of treatment, recovery, harm reduction, case management, or other services offered in connection with any of the strategies described in this section.

E. ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF PREGNANT OR PARENTING WOMEN AND THEIR

FAMILIES, INCLUDING BABIES WITH NEONATAL ABSTINENCE

SYNDROME
Address the needs of pregnant or parenting women with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, and the needs of their families, including babies with neonatal abstinence syndrome ("NAY'), through evidence -based or evidence -informed programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, those that:

1. Support evidence -based or evidence -informed treatment, including MAT, recovery services and supports, and prevention services for pregnant women —or women who could become pregnant —who have OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, and other measures to educate and provide support to families affected by Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome.

2. Expand comprehensive evidence -based treatment and recovery services, including MAT, for uninsured women with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions for up to 1.2 months postpartum.

E-9

3. Provide training for obstetricians or other healthcare personnel who work with pregnant women and their families regarding treatment of OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH conditions.

4. Expand comprehensive evidence -based treatment and recovery support for NAS babies; expand services for better continuum of care with infant -need dyad; and expand long-term treatment and services for medical monitoring of NAS babies and their families.

5. Provide training to health care providers who work with pregnant or parenting women on best practices for compliance with federal requirements that children born with NAS get referred to appropriate services and receive a plan of safe care.

6. Provide child and family supports for parenting women with OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH conditions.

7. Provide enhanced family support and child care services for parents with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.

8. Provide enhanced support for children and family members suffering trauma as a result of addiction in the family; and offer trauma -informed behavioral health treatment for adverse childhood events.

9. Offer home -based wrap -around services to persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including, but not limited to, parent skills training.

10. Provide support for Children's Services —Fund additional positions and services, including supportive housing and other residential services, relating to children being removed from the home and/or placed in foster care due to custodial opioid use.

PART TWO: PREVENTION
A. PREVENT OVER -PRESCRIBING AND ENSURE APPROPRIATE

PRESCRIBING AND DISPENSING OF OPIOIDS
Support efforts to prevent over -prescribing and ensure appropriate prescribing and dispensing of opioids through evidence -based or evidence -informed programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Funding medical provider education and outreach regarding best prescribing practices for opioids consistent with the Guidelines for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, including providers at hospitals (academic detailing).

E-10

2. Training for health care providers regarding safe and responsible opioid prescribing, dosing, and tapering patients off opioids.

3. Continuing Medical Education (CME) on appropriate prescribing of opioids.

4. Providing Support for non-opioid pain treatment alternatives, including training providers to offer or refer to multi -modal, evidence -informed treatment of pain.

5. Supporting enhancements or improvements to Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs ("PDMPs"), including, but not limited to, improvements that:
a. Increase the number of prescribers using PDMPs;
b. Improve point -of -care decision -making by increasing the quantity, quality, or format of data available to prescribers using PDMPs, by improving the interface that prescribers use to access PDMP data, or both; or
C. Enable states to use PDMP data in support of surveillance or intervention strategies, including MAT referrals and follow-up for individuals identified within PDMP data as likely to experience OUD in a manner that complies with all relevant privacy and security laws and rules.

6. Ensuring PDMPs incorporate available overdose/naloxone deployment data, including the United States Department of Transportation's Emergency Medical Technician overdose database in a manner that complies with all relevant privacy and security laws and rules.

7. Increasing electronic prescribing to prevent diversion or forgery.

8. Educating dispensers on appropriate opioid dispensing.

B. PREVENT MISUSE OF OPIOIDS
Support efforts to discourage or prevent misuse of opioids through evidence -based or evidence - informed programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Funding media campaigns to prevent opioid misuse.

2. Corrective advertising or affirmative public education campaigns based on evidence.

3. Public education relating to drug disposal.

4. Drug take -back disposal or destruction programs.

E-11

5. Funding community anti -drug coalitions that engage in drug prevention efforts.

6. Supporting community coalitions in implementing evidence -informed prevention, such as reduced social access and physical access, stigma reduction —including staffing, educational campaigns, support for people in treatment or recovery, or training of coalitions in evidence -informed implementation, including the Strategic Prevention Framework developed by the U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration ("SAMHSA").

7. Engaging non -profits and faith -based communities as systems to support prevention.

8. Funding evidence -based prevention programs in schools or evidence -informed school and community education programs and campaigns for students, families, school employees, school athletic programs, parent -teacher and student associations, and others.

9. School -based or youth -focused programs or strategies that have demonstrated effectiveness in preventing drug misuse and seem likely to be effective in preventing the uptake and use of opioids.

10. Create or support community -based education or intervention services for families, youth, and adolescents at risk for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.

11. Support evidence -informed programs or curricula to address mental health needs of young people who may be at risk of misusing opioids or other drugs, including emotional modulation and resilience skills.

12. Support greater access to mental health services and supports for young people, including services and supports provided by school nurses, behavioral health workers or other school staff, to address mental health needs in young people that (when not properly addressed) increase the risk of opioid or another drug misuse.

C. PREVENT OVERDOSE DEATHS AND OTHER HARMS (HARM REDUCTION) Support efforts to prevent or reduce overdose deaths or other opioid-related harms through evidence -based or evidence -informed programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Increased availability and distribution of naloxone and other drugs that treat overdoses for first responders, overdose patients, individuals with OUD and their friends and family members, schools, community navigators and outreach workers, persons being released from jail or prison, or other members of the general public.

2. Public health entities providing free naloxone to anyone in the community.

E-12

3. Training and education regarding naloxone and other drugs that treat overdoses for first responders, overdose patients, patients taking opioids, families, schools, community support groups, and other members of the general public.

4. Enabling school nurses and other school staff to respond to opioid overdoses, and provide them with naloxone, training, and support.

5. Expanding, improving, or developing data tracking software and applications for overdoses/naloxone revivals.

6. Public education relating to emergency responses to overdoses.

7. Public education relating to immunity and Good Samaritan laws.

8. Educating first responders regarding the existence and operation of immunity and Good Samaritan laws.

9. Syringe service programs and other evidence -informed programs to reduce harms associated with intravenous drug use, including supplies, staffing, space, peer support services, referrals to treatment, fentanyl checking, connections to care, and the full range of harm reduction and treatment services provided by these programs.

10. Expanding access to testing and treatment for infectious diseases such as HIV and Hepatitis C resulting from intravenous opioid use.

11. Supporting mobile units that offer or provide referrals to harm reduction services, treatment, recovery supports, health care, or other appropriate services to persons that use opioids or persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.

12. Providing training in harm reduction strategies to health care providers, students, peer recovery coaches, recovery outreach specialists, or other professionals that provide care to persons who use opioids or persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.

13. Supporting screening for fentanyl in routine clinical toxicology testing.

PART THREE: OTHER STRATEGIES
A. FIRST RESPONDERS
In addition to items in section C, D and H relating to first responders, support the following:

1. Education of law enforcement or other first responders regarding appropriate practices and precautions when dealing with fentanyl or other drugs.

E-13

2. Provision of wellness and support services for first responders and others who experience secondary trauma associated with opioid-related emergency events.

Support efforts to provide leadership, planning, coordination, facilitations, training and technical assistance to abate the opioid epidemic through activities, programs, or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Statewide, regional, local or community regional planning to identify root causes of addiction and overdose, goals for reducing harms related to the opioid epidemic, and areas and populations with the greatest needs for treatment intervention services, and to support training and technical assistance and other strategies to abate the opioid epidemic described in this opioid abatement strategy list.

2. A dashboard to (a) share reports, recommendations, or plans to spend opioid settlement funds; (b) to show how opioid settlement funds have been spent; (c) to report program or strategy outcomes; or (d) to track, share or visualize key opioid- or health -related indicators and supports as identified through collaborative statewide, regional, local or community processes.

3. Invest in infrastructure or staffing at government or not -for -profit agencies to support collaborative, cross -system coordination with the purpose of preventing overprescribing, opioid misuse, or opioid overdoses, treating those with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, supporting them in treatment or recovery, connecting them to care, or implementing other strategies to abate the opioid epidemic described in this opioid abatement strategy list.

4. Provide resources to staff government oversight and management of opioid abatement programs.

C. TRAINING
In addition to the training referred to throughout this document, support training to abate the opioid epidemic through activities, programs, or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, those that:

1. Provide funding for staff training or networking programs and services to improve the capability of government, community, and not -for -profit entities to abate the opioid crisis.

2. Support infrastructure and staffing for collaborative cross -system coordination to prevent opioid misuse, prevent overdoses, and treat those with OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH conditions, or implement other strategies to abate the opioid epidemic described in this opioid abatement strategy list (e.g., health care, primary care, pharmacies, PDMPs, etc.).

E-14

D. RESEARCH
Support opioid abatement research that may include, but is not limited to, the following:

1. Monitoring, surveillance, data collection and evaluation of programs and strategies described in this opioid abatement strategy list.

2. Research non-opioid treatment of chronic pain.

3. Research on improved service delivery for modalities such as SBIRT that demonstrate promising but mixed results in populations vulnerable to opioid use disorders.

4. Research on novel harm reduction and prevention efforts such as the provision of fentanyl test strips.

5. Research on innovative supply-side enforcement efforts such as improved detection of mail -based delivery of synthetic opioids.

6. Expanded research on swift/certain/fair models to reduce and deter opioid misuse within criminal justice populations that build upon promising approaches used to address other substances (e.g., Hawaii HOPE and Dakota 24/7).

7. Epidemiological surveillance of OUD-related behaviors in critical populations, including individuals entering the criminal justice system, including, but not limited to approaches modeled on the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring ("ADAM") system.

8. Qualitative and quantitative research regarding public health risks and harm reduction opportunities within illicit drug markets, including surveys of market participants who sell or distribute illicit opioids.

9. Geospatial analysis of access barriers to MAT and their association with treatment engagement and treatment outcomes.

E-15

EXHIBIT F-1
List of States and Pre -Credit Overall Allocation Percentages Alabama

1.5958653635%
Alaska

0.2283101787%
American Samoa

0.0171221696%
Arizona

2.3755949882%
Arkansas

0.9322152924%
California

9.9213830698%
Colorado

1.6616291219%
Connecticut

1.2938102647%
Delaware

0.4420285052%
District of Columbia

0.1799774824%
Florida

7.0259134409%
Georgia

2.7882080114%
Guam

0.0480366565%
Hawaii

0.3246488040%
Idaho

0.4919080117%
Illinois

3.3263363702%
Indiana

2.2168933059%
Iowa

0.7419256132%
Kansas

0.7840793410%
Kentucky

1.9963344879%
Louisiana

1.4650905059%
Maine

0.5293231313%
Maryland

2.1106090494%
Massachusetts

2.3035761083%
Michigan

3.4020234989%
Minnesota

1.2972597706%
Mississippi

0.8624327860%
Missouri

2.0056475170%
Montana

0.3125481816%
N. Mariana Islands

0.0167059202%
Nebraska

0.4171546352%
Nevada

1.20176571.35%
New Hampshire

0.5784834777%
New Jersey

2.7551354545%
New Mexico

0.7989379794%
New York

5.390381.3405%
North Carolina

3.2502525994%
F-1

North Dakota

0.1700251989%
Ohio

4.3567051408%
Oklahoma

1.5322312508%
Oregon

1.3741405009%
Pennsylvania

4.5882419559%
Puerto Rico

0.7101195950%
Rhode Island

0.4465429178%
South Carolina

1.5393083548%
South Dakota

0.1982071487%
Tennessee

2.6881474977%
Texas

6.2932157196%
Utah

1.1466798699%
Vermont

0.2544890561%
Virgin Islands

0.0315673573%
Virginia

2.2801150757%
Washington

2.3189040182%
West Virginia

1.0567416533%
Wisconsin

1.7582560561%
Wyoming

0.1668134842%
F-2

EXHIBIT F-2
List of Eligible Settling States and Overall Allocation Percentages Alabama

1.89200243102%
Alaska

0.27067660158%
American Samoa

0.02029944832%
Arizona

2.81642273552%
Arkansas

1.10520200495%
California

11.44545606988%
Colorado

1.96996965401%
Connecticut

1.53389641887%
Delaware

0.52405361097%
District of Columbia

0.21337503900%
Georgia

3.30560237492%
Guam

0.05695058797%
Hawaii

0.38489232262%
Idaho

0.58318901784%
Illinois

3.94358862758%
Indiana

2.62827154459%
Iowa

0.87960118435%
Kansas

0.92957717690%
Kentucky

2.36678468650%
Maine

0.62754708146%
Maryland

2.50226462938%
Massachusetts

2.731.03965821%
Michigan

4.03332065304%
Minnesota

1.53798603302%
Mississippi

1.02247029410%
Missouri

2.37782588971%
Montana

0.37054624593%
N. Mariana Islands

0.01980595749%
Nebraska

0.49456401641%
Nevada

1.42477160259%
New Hampshire

0.68582987703%
New Jersey

3.26639270254%
New Mexico

0.94719306138%
North Carolina

3.85338635698%
North Dakota

0.20157595806%
Ohio

5.1.6515798008%
Oklahoma

1.81656004174%
F-3

Oregon on

1.62913315104%
Pennsylvania

5.43965996948%
Puerto Rico

0.84189307619%
South Carolina

1.82495040990%
South Dakota

0.23498749685%
Tennessee

3.18697411246%
Texas

7.46101752221%
Utah

1.35946374363%
Vermont

0.30171336741%
Virgin Islands

0.03742516012%
Virginia

2.70322507443%
Washington

2.74921189468%
Wisconsin

2.08452718413 0
Wyoming

0.19776826088%
F-4

EXHIBIT G
Subdivisions and Special Districts Eligible to Receive Direct Allocations from the Subdivision Fund and Subdivision Fund Allocation Percentages The Subdivisions and Special Districts set forth on this Exhibit G are eligible to receive direct allocations from the Subdivision Fund, if such Subdivisions and Special Districts are otherwise eligible to receive such funds under this Agreement. By default, the Subdivisions and Special Districts set forth on this Exhibit G shall include all Subdivisions and Special Districts set forth on Exhibit G of the national opioid settlement agreement dated July 21, 2021 with Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., including all amendments up to the Preliminary Agreement Date of this agreement. A State may elect to add any additional Subdivisions and Special Districts to this Exhibit G at any time prior to the Initial Participation Date.

Immediately upon the effectiveness of any State -Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, Statutory Trust, or voluntary redistribution allowed by subsection VIII.E.3 (or upon the effectiveness of an amendment to any State -Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, Statutory Trust, or voluntary redistribution allowed by subsection VIII.E.3) that addresses allocation from the Subdivision Fund, whether before or after the Initial Participation Date, this Exhibit G will automatically be amended to reflect the allocation from the Subdivision Fund pursuant to the State - Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, Statutory Trust, or voluntary redistribution allowed by subsection VIII.E.3.

For the avoidance of doubt, inclusion on this Exhibit G shall not create any claim for any amount of the Settlement Fund, and no such amounts shall be allocated or distributed to any Subdivision or Special District included herein if such Subdivision or Special District does not otherwise meet all requirements to receive any such funds pursuant to the Agreement.

G-1

EXHIBIT H
[Intentionally Omitted]
H-1

EXHIBIT I
Subdivisions with a Population Greater than 10,0001
Entities denoted with an asterisk (*) are Primary Subdivisions with a population greater than 30,000. All other entities listed have populations greater than 10,000 but less than 30,000. 1-1

EXHIBIT J-1
AbbVie Entities
J-1

List Of Subsidiaries
The following is a list of subsidiaries of AbbVie Inc. as of December 31, 2021. AbbVie is not a subsidiary of any other corporation.

Domestic Subsidiaries
Incorporation
AbbVie Aviation LLC Illinois
AbbVie Biopharmaceuticals LLC Delaware
AbbVie Finance Corporation Delaware
AbbVie Global Holdings Inc. Delaware
AbbVie Pharma Inc. Delaware

AbbVie Purchasing LLC Delaware
AbbVie Resources Inc. Delaware
AbbVie Resources International Inc. Delaware
AbbVie Services Inc. Delaware
AbbVie US LLC Delaware
AGN International Inc. Delaware
AGN Sundry, LLC Delaware
Allergan GI Corp Delaware

Allergan Lending 2 LLC Delaware
Allergan Pharma Inc. Delaware
Allergan Puerto Rico Holdings, Inc. Delaware
Allergan Therapeutics LLC Delaware
Aptalis Pharma US, Inc. Delaware

Chase Pharmaceuticals Corporation Delaware
Durata Holdings, Inc. Delaware
Eden Biodesign, LLC Delaware
Fremont Holding L.L.C. Delaware
Keller Medical, Inc. Delaware
LifeCell Corporation Delaware

Naurex Inc. Delaware
Pharmax Holding Limited Delaware
Rowell Laboratories, Inc. Minnesota
Sapphire Merger Sub, Inc. Delaware
Suffolk Merger Sub, Inc. Delaware
Transderm, Inc. Delaware
Warner Chilcott Leasing Equipment Inc. Delaware

Zeltiq A LLC [Delaware

Foreign Subsidiaries
Incorporation
AbbVie Bahamas Ltd. Bahamas
AbbVie Ltd Bermuda
AbbVie Global Enterprises Ltd. Bermuda
Allergan Holdings B2, Ltd. Bermuda
Warner Chilcott Holdings Company II, Limited Bermuda

Warner Chilcott Limited Bermuda
Allergan Productos Farmaceuticos Ltda. Brazil
AbbVie Holdings Corporation Canada
Allergan Holdings C, Ltd. Cayman Islands
Allergan Laboratorios Limitada Chile
Allergan Medical Device (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. China

AbbVie S.A.S. Colombia
Allergan de Colombia S.A. Colombia
Allergan ApS Denmark
AbbVie Oy Finland
Allergan France SAS France
Forest Holdings France S.A.S. France
AbbVie Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG Germany

AbbVie Pharmaceuticals GmbH Germany
AbbVie (Gibraltar) Holdings Limited Gibraltar
AbbVie, Socieded Anonima Guatemala
AbbVie Gyogyszerkereskedelmi Korlatolt Felelossegu Tarsasag Hungary Allergan Healthcare India Private Limited India
AbbVie Ireland Holdings unlimited Company Ireland

Allergan Botox Unlimited Company (In voluntary liquidation) Ireland Allergan Pharma Limited Ireland
Allergan Services International, Unlimited Company Ireland Fournier Laboratories Ireland Limited Ireland
Tosara Exhorts Limited (In voluntary liquidation) Ireland Abbuie Biopharmaceuticals Ltd. Israel

Allergan Israel Ltd. Israel
Marbelle Threads Ltd. Israel
Allergan K.K. Japan
AbbVie SIA Latvia
AbbVie Biotherapsutics Siar.l. Luxembourg
AbbVie Holdings SA r.l. Luxembourg
Allergan Europe SA. r.l. Luxembourg

Allergan Funding SCS Luxembourg
AbbVie Sdn. Bhd. Malaysia
Allergan Malta 11 Limited Malta
AbbVie Farmac6uticos, S.A. de C.V. Mexico
AbbVie Central Finance B.V. Netherlands
AbbVie Ireland NL B.V. Netherlands

AbbVie Japan Holdings B.V. Netherlands
Aptalis Holding B.V. Netherlands
AbbVie Limited New Zealand
AbbVie, S. de R.L. Panama
AbbVie Sp. z o.o. Poland
AbbVie, L.da Portugal

AbbVie Corp Puerto Rico
Allergan Saudi Arabia LLC* Saudi Arabia
AbbVie Holdings s.r.o. Slovakia
AbbVie (Pty) Ltd. South Africa

AbbVie AB Sweden
Allergan Norden AB Sweden
AbbVie Biopharmaceuticals Gmbh Switzerland
Allergan Pharmaceuticals Taiwan Co. Ltd. Taiwan
AbbVie Tibbi Ila0ar Sanayi ve Ticaret Limited $irketi Turkey AbbVie Australasia Holdings Limited United Kingdom
AbbVie UK Holdco Limited United Kingdom

Allergan Holdco UK Limited United Kingdom
Lifecell EMEA Limited (In voluntary liquidation) United Kingdom AbbVie Pharmaceuticals SCA. Venezuela
* Ownership of such subsidiary is less than 100% by AbbVie or an AbbVie subsidiary

EXHIBIT J-2
Allman Entities
J-2

agn-ex211 448.htm
EX-21.1 10 agn-ex211_448.htm EX-21
https://www . sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/ 1578845/00015645902000503...

Exhibit 21.1
Name
Jurisdiction of Incorporation
AGN International Inc.

US - Delaware
AGN Kythera, L.P.

US- Delaware
AGN Labs LLC
US - Delaware

AGN LLC
US - Delaware
AGN Sundry LLC
US - Delaware
Akarna Therapeutics, Limited
UK
Allergan WC 1 S.a r.l.

Luxembourg
Allergan (Chengdu) Medical Aesthetics Clinic Co., Ltd.

China
Allergan (Thailand) Limited
Thailand
Allergan AG
Switzerland
Allergan AHI S.a r.l. Management (DIFC Branch)
UAB
Allergan AHI S.a r.l.

Luxembourg
Allergan AHI SA r.l., Luxembourg, Zweigniederlassung Zug Branch Switzerland
Allergan Akarna LLC
US - Delaware
Allergan ApS
Denmark
Allergan AS
Norway
Allergan Australia Pty Limited
Australia
Allergan B.V.

Netherlands, The
Allergan Baltics, UAB
Lithuania
Allergan Baltics, UAB Eesti filiaal
Estonia Branch
Allergan Baltics, UAB Latvijas filias
Latvia
Allergan Biologics Ltd.

UK
Allergan Botox Unlimited Company
Ireland
Allergan Bulgaria EOOD
Bulgaria
Allergan C.I.S. SARL
Russian Federation
Allergan Capital S.a r.l.

Luxembourg
Allergan Capital 2 S.a r.l.

Luxembourg
Allergan Capital 2 Sarl, Luxembourg, Zweigniederlassung, Zug Switzerland
Allergan Capital S.a r.l., Luxembourg, Zweigniederlassung Zug Branch Switzerland
Allergan Cayman Islands Irish Branch
Ireland
Allergan Costa Rica S.R.L
Costa Rica
Allergan CZ, s.r.o.

Czech Republic
Allergan d.o.o. Beograd
Serbia
Allergan de Colombia S.A.

Colombia
Allergan de Venezuela, C.A.

Venzuela
Allergan Development Ventures I Ireland Unlimited Company Ireland
Allergan Development Ventures I LP
Bermuda
Allergan Development Ventures I UK
UK
Allergan Equities Unlimited Company
Ireland
Allergan Europe S.a r.l.

Luxembourg
Allergan Finance S.a r.l.

Luxembourg
Allergan Finance, LLC
US - Nevada
Allergan Finco 2 Inc.

US - Delaware
Allergan Finco Inc.

US - Delaware
1 of 5 12/3/2021, 5:42 PM

agn-ex211 448.htm
https://www . sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/ 1578845/00015645902000503...

Exhibit 21.1
Allergan Finland Oy
Finland
Allergan France SAS
France
Allergan Funding SCS
Luxembourg
Allergan Furiex Ireland Limited
Ireland
Allergan GI Corp.

US - Delaware
Allergan Global S.a r.l.

Luxembourg
Allergan GmbH
Germany
Allergan GP Holding LLC
US- Delaware
Allergan Healthcare India Private Limited
India
Allergan Healthcare Philippines, Inc.

Philippines
Allergan Hellas Pharmaceuticals S.A.

Greece
Allergan Holdco UK Limited
UK
Allergan Holdco US, Inc.

US - Delaware
Allergan Holdings B Ltd.

Bermuda
Allergan Holdings B1, Inc.

US - Delaware
Allergan Holdings B2 Limited
Bermuda
Allergan Holdings C Ltd
Cayman Island
Allergan Holdings France SAS
France
Allergan Holdings Limited
UK
Allergan Holdings S. a r.l.

Luxembourg
Allergan Holdings Unlimited Company
Ireland
Allergan Holdings, Inc.

US - Delaware
Allergan Hong Kong Limited
Hong Kong
Allergan Hungary Kft.

Hungary
Allergan Ilaclari Ticaret A.S.

Turkey
Allergan Inc.

Canada
Allergan India Private Limited
India
Allergan Industrie SAS
France
Allergan Information Consulting (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.

China
Allergan International Holding S.a r.l.

Luxembourg
Allergan International YK
Japan
Allergan Ireland Finance Limited
Ireland
Allergan Ireland Holdings Unlimited Company
Ireland
Allergan Ireland Limited
Ireland
Allergan Israel Limited
Israel
Allergan Japan KK
Japan
Allergan KK
Japan
Allergan Korea Ltd
Korea
Allergan Laboratories, LLC
US - Delaware
Allergan Laboratorios Limitada
Chile
Allergan Lending 2 LLC
US - Delaware
Allergan Lending LLC
US - Delaware
Allergan Limited
UK
Allergan Luxembourg International S.a r.l.

Luxembourg
Allergan Malaysia Sdn. Bhd.

Malaysia
2 of 5 12/3/2021, 5:42 PM

agn-ex211 448.htm
https://www . sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/ 1578845/00015645902000503...

Exhibit 21.1
Allergan Malta Holding Limited
Malta
Allergan Malta II Limited
Malta
Allergan Malta Limited
Malta
Allergan Medical Device (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.

China
Allergan Middle East Limited
United Arab Emirates
Allergan N.V.

Belgium
Allergan New Zealand Ltd.

New Zealand
Allergan NK
Japan
Allergan Norden AB
Sweden
Allergan Norden AB Finnish branch
Finland
Allergan Overseas Holding
Cayman Island
Allergan Pharma Inc.

US - Delaware
Allergan Pharma Limited
Ireland
Allergan Pharmaceuticals (Proprietary) Ltd.

South Africa
Allergan Pharmaceuticals Holdings (Ireland) Unlimited Company Ireland
Allergan Pharmaceuticals International Limited
Ireland
Allergan Pharmaceuticals International Limited Jordan Office Jordan
Allergan Pharmaceuticals International Limited Lebanon Office Lebanon
Allergan Pharmaceuticals Ireland
Ireland
Allergan Pharmaceuticals Taiwan Co. Ltd.

Taiwan
Allergan Productos Farmaceuticos S.A.

Argentina
Allergan Produtos Farmaceuticos Ltda.

Brazil
Allergan Property Holdings, LLC
US - Delaware
Allergan Puerto Rico Holdings, Inc.

US - Delaware
Allergan S.A.

Spain
Allergan S.p.A.

Italy
Allergan Sales Puerto Rico, Inc.

US - California
Allergan Sales, LLC (d/b/a Allergan; d/b/a Bioscience Laboratories) US - Delaware
Allergan Saudi Arabia LLC
Saudi Arablia
Allergan Scientific Office
Egypt
Allergan Services International Unlimited Company
Ireland
Allergan Servicios Profesionales, S. de R.L. de C.V.

Mexico
Allergan Singapore Pte. Ltd.

Singapore
Allergan Singapore Pte. Ltd. Indonesia Rep Office
Indonesia
Allergan Singapore Pte. Ltd. Vietnam Rep Office
Vietnam
Allergan SK s.r.o.

Slovak Republic
Allergan Sp. z.o.o.

Poland
Allergan S.R.L.

Romania
Allergan Therapeutics LLC
US- Delaware
Allergan UK LLP
UK
Allergan Ukraine, LLC
Ukraine
Allergan USA, Inc. (d/b/a Pacificom / Pacific Communications) US - Delaware
Allergan W.C. Holding Inc.

US - Delaware
Allergan WC 2 S.a r.l.

Luxembourg
Allergan WC Ireland Holdings Ltd.

Ireland
3 of 5 12/3/2021, 5:42 PM

agn-ex211 448.htm
https://www . sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/ 1578845/00015645902000503...

Exhibit 21.1
Allergan, Inc.

US - Delaware
Allergan, S.A. de C.V.

Mexico
Anterios, Inc.

US - Delaware
Aptalis Holding B.V.

Netherlands, The
Aptalis Netherlands B.V.

Netherlands, The
Aptalis Pharma Canada ULC
Canada
Aptalis Pharma S.O.

Italy
Aptalis Pharma UK Limited
UK
Aptalis Pharma US, Inc.

US - Delaware
AqueSys, Inc.

US - Delaware
Bonti, Inc.

US - Delaware
Cearna Aesthetics, Inc
US - Delaware
Chase Pharmaceuticals Corporation
US - Delaware
Collagen Luxembourg SA
Luxembourg
Del Mar Indemnity Company, LLC
US - Hawaii
Durata Holdings, Inc.

US - Delaware
Durata Therapeuctics U.S. Limited
US - Delaware
Durata Therapeutics, Inc.

US - Delaware
Eden Biodesign, LLC
US - Delaware
Elastagen Pty Limited
Australia
Envy Medical, Inc.

US - Delaware
Eurand France S.A.S.

France
Exemplar Pharma LLC
US - Delaware
Forest Finance B.V.

Netherlands, The
Forest Holdings France S. A.S.

France
Forest Laboratories Holdings Limited
Ireland
Forest Laboratories Ireland Ltd
Ireland
ForSight VISIONS, Inc.

US - Delaware
Furiex Pharmaceuticals, LLC
US - Delaware
Keller Medical, Inc.

US - Delaware
Kythera Biopharmaceuticals Australia Pty Ltd.

Australia
Kythera Holdings Ltd.

Bermuda
LifeCell Corporation
US - Delaware
LifeCell EMEA Limited
UK
LifeCell EMEA Limited Austria branch
Austria
LifeCell EMEA Limited Italy branch
Italy
LifeCell EMEA Limited Sucursa) en Espana
Spain
LifeCell EMEA Limited, Zweigniederlassung Zurich
Switzerland
LifeCell Medical Resources Limited in voluntary liquidation Ireland
MAP Pharmaceuticals LLC
US - Delaware
McGhan Ireland Holdings Ltd.

Ireland
McGahn Limited
Ireland
MPEX Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

US - Delaware
Naurex Inc.

US - Delaware
Northwood Medical Innovation, Ltd.

UK
4 of 5 12/3/2021, 5:42 PM

agn-ex211 448.htm
https://www . sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/ 1578845/00015645902000503...

Exhibit 21.1
Oculeve, Inc.

US - Delaware
Odyssea Pharma SPRL
Belgium
Pacific Pharma, Inc.

US - Delaware
Pharm-Allergan GmbH Austria branch
Austria
Pharmax Holding Limited
US - Delaware
Renable Pharma Limited
UK
Repros Therapeutics Inc,.

US- Delaware
RP Merger Sub, Inc.

US - Delaware
Seabreeze Silicone Unlimited Company
Ireland
Silicone Engineering Inc.

US - California
obira Therapeutics, Inc.

US - Delaware
opokine Therapeutics, Inc.

US - Delaware
osara Exports Limited
Ireland
ransderm, Inc.

US - Utah
Varioraw Percutive Sarl
Switzerland
Vicuron Pharmaceuticals LLC
US - Delaware
Viokace LLC
US - Delaware
Vitae Pharmaceuticals LLC
US - Delaware
Warner Chilcott Holdings Company II, Limited
Bermuda
Warner Chilcott Holdings Company III, Limited
Bermuda
Warner Chilcott Intermediate (Ireland) Limited
Ireland
Warner Chilcott Leasing Equipment Inc.

US - Delaware
Warner Chilcott Limited
Bermuda
Warner Chilcott Nederland B.V.

Netherlands, The
Warner Chilcott Pharmaceuticals S. ar.l.

Switzerland
Warner Chilcott Sales (US), LLC
US - Delaware

ZELTIQ A, LLC
US - Delaware
ZELTIQ Aesthetics, Inc.

US - Delaware
ZELTIQ International, LLC
US - Delaware
ZELTIQ International, LLC - Singapore Branch
Singapore
ZELTIQ Ireland International Holdings UC
Ireland
ZELTIQ Ireland Unlimited Company
Ireland
ZELTIQ Limited
United Kingdom
Zeltiq Limited Spanish branch
Spain
Zenpep LLC
US - Delaware
5 of 5 12/3/2021, 5:42 PM

EXHIBIT J-3
Divested Entities
J-3

Schedule 4.6(c) - Transferred Group
Ownership interest of Seller Parent and its Subsidiaries is 100% unless otherwise indicated.

1. Warner Chilcott Company, LLC

2. Warner Chilcott (Ireland) Limited

3. F Warner Chilcott Finance LLC.

4. Warner Chilcott Australia Pty. Ltd.

5. Warner Chilcott Pharmaceuticals B.V.B.A.

6. Warner Chilcott France SAS

7. Warner Chilcott Italy S.r.l.

8. Actavis Pharma Iberia S.L. (f/k/a Warner Chilcott Iberia S.L.)

9. Robin Hood Holdings Ltd.

10. Paomar plc

1.1.e Actavis Pharma Pty Ltd.

12. ", Makoff R&D Laboratories, Inc.

1.3.'e R&D Pharmaceutical, Inc.

14. € R&D Ferriecit Capital Resources, Inc.

1.5. `"' R&D Research & Development Corp.

16. `°' R&D New Media Services, Inc.

1.7. ""°" Royce Laboratories, Inc.

18. Royce Research Group, Inc.

1.9. Royce Research & Development Limited Partnership I

20. " The Rugby Group, Inc.

LA_ LAN01:289784.8A
OC\2075745.21
Puerto Rico
Ireland
Delaware
Australia
Belgium
France
Italy
Spain
Malta
Cyprus
Australia
California
California
California
California
California
Florida
Florida
Florida
New York
CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER ALLERGAN TX 00037736

21. Watson Laboratories, Inc. Ohio
New York

22. Rugby Laboratories, Inc.

New York

23. Changzhou Siyao Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd. (25%)
China

24. Watson Pharmaceuticals (Asia) Ltd.

BVI

25. WP Holdings, Ltd.

BVI

26. Watson Pharmaceuticals, China Ltd
BVI

27. Med All Enterprise Consulting (Shanghai) Co. Ltd.

China

28. Nicobrand Limited
Northern Ireland

29. Watson Pharmaceuticals International Ltd.

BVI

30. Watson Diagnostics, Inc.

Delaware

31. Actavis Laboratories NY, Inc.

New York

32. Circa Pharmaceuticals West, Inc.

California

33. Circa Sub
New York

34. Andrx LLC
Delaware

35. Andrx South Carolina I, Inc.

South Carolina

36. Andrx Pharmaceuticals (Mass), Inc.

Florida

37. Andrx Pharmaceuticals Equipment #1, LLC
Florida

38. Andrx Pharmaceuticals (NC) Inc.

Florida

39. Andrx Pharmaceuticals, (NC) Equipment LLC
Delaware

40. SR Six, Inc.

Florida

41. ' RxAPS, Inc.

Florida

42. Andrx Pharmaceuticals Sales and Marketing, Inc.

Florida

43. Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc.

Florida
LA_ LAN01:289784.8A
OC\2075745.21
CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER ALLERGAN TX 00037737

44. Watson Management Corporation
Florida

45. Watson Therapeutics, Inc.

Florida

46. Andrx Pharmaceuticals, LLC
Delaware

47. Andrx Labs LLC
Delaware

48. Andrx Laboratories (NJ) Inc.

Delaware

49. Watson Cobalt Holdings, LLC
Delaware

50. Watson Manufacturing Services, Inc.

Delaware

51. Natrapac, Inc.

Utah

52. Coventry Acquisition, LLC
Delaware

53. Cobalt Laboratories, LLC
Delaware

54. Watson Pharma Private Ltd.

India

55.E
Watson Laboratories, LLC
Delaware

56. Actavis Puerto Rico Holdings Inc.

Delaware

57. Actavis US Holding LLC
Delaware

58. Actavis LLC
Delaware

59. Actavis South Atlantic LLC
Delaware

60. Actavis Elizabeth LLC
Delaware

61. Actavis Kadian LLC
Delaware

62. Actavis Mid Atlantic LLC
Delaware

63. Actavis Totowa LLC
Delaware

64. Actavis Pharmaceuticals NJ, Inc.

Delaware

65. Watson Laboratories, Inc.

Connecticut

66. ' Watson Laboratories, Inc. — Arizona
Delaware
LA_ LAN01:289784.8A
OC\2075745.21
CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER ALLERGAN TX 00037738

67. Schein Bayer Pharmaceutical Services, Inc.

68. Schein Pharmaceutical International, Inc.

69.E Schein Pharmaceutical Ltd

70. Marsam Pharma, LLC

71. MSI, Inc.

72. f Actavis Holding 2 Sarl

73. Actavis Services (Asia) Ltd.

74.E Arrow Laboratories, Ltd.

75. Arrow Supplies, Ltd.*

76. Marrow Pharmaceuticals Research & Development Co Ltd. (50%)

77. "°"" Actavis S.a.r.l.

78. ';''; "Specifar"

79. " Alet

80. f Ascent Pharmahealth Pty Ltd

81. f Actavis Australia Pty Ltd

82. f Ascent Australia Pty Ltd

83. ' Actavis Pty Ltd

84. Ascent Pharma Pty Ltd.

85. Ascent Pharmahealth Asia Pte Ltd

86. f Drug Houses of Australia Pte Ltd.

87. "` Ascent Pharmahealth Hong Kong Ltd.

88. Actavis Sdn. Bhd.

89. "''; Arrow Group ApS
LA_ LAN01:289784.8A
OC\2075745.21
Delaware
Delaware
Bermuda
Delaware
Delaware
Luxembourg
Malta
Malta
Malta
China
Luxembourg
Greece
Greece
Australia
Australia
Australia
Australia
Australia
Singapore
Singapore
Hong Kong
Malaysia
Denmark
CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER ALLERGAN TX 00037739

90. Arrow ApS
Denmark

91. Makewhey Products Pty. Ltd.**
South Africa

92. Actavis Holdings South Africa (Pty) Ltd.

South Africa

93. Actavis Pharma (Pty) Ltd.

South Africa

94. Actavis (Pty) Ltd.

South Africa

95. Scriptpharm Marketing (Pty) Ltd
South Africa

96. Referral -Net (Pty) Ltd.*
South Africa

97. Spear Pharmaceuticals (Pty) Ltd
South Africa

98. Pharmascript Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (64.8%)
South Africa

99. Arrow Pharma Tender (Pty) Ltd.** (65%)
South Africa
100.

Zelphy 1308 (Pty) Ltd.

South Africa
101.

Arrowblue Produtos Farmaceuticos SA
Portugal
102.

Bowmed Ltd
UK
103.

Selamine Ltd.

Ireland
104.

Seeker Investments Ltd.

BVI
105.

SC Pharma (Pty) Ltd. (25%)
Australia
106.

Willow Pharmaceuticals Pty Ltd.

Australia
107
Medis Pharma Pty Ltd
Australia
108.'
Eremad Pty Ltd.

Australia
109.E
Arrow Lakemedel AB
Sweden
110.

Arrow Generics Ltd.

UK
111.'
Arrow No 7 Ltd
UK
112.'
Breath Ltd
UK
LA_ LAN01:289784.8A
OC\2075745.21
CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER ALLERGAN TX 00037740

113
Soosysoo Ltd. (50%)**
BVI
114.:

Actavis New Zealand Limited
New Zealand
115.'
Watson Laboratories, S. de R.L. de C.V
Mexico
116.

Actavis Pharma Company
Canada
117
Abri Pharmceuticals Company
Canada
118.

Actavis Pharma Holding 4 ehf. (APH4)
Iceland
119.E
Actavis Pharma Holding 5 ehf. (APH5)
Iceland
120.

Actavis Group ehf.

Iceland
121
Actavis Group PTC ehf.

Iceland
122.

Actavis Dutch Holding BV
Netherlands
123."+
LLC Actavis
Russia
124.

Actavis Ilaclari AS #
Turkey
125.

Actavis ehf.

Iceland
126.

Medis ehf.

Iceland
127."
Medis Pharma France SAS
France
128.

Medis-Danmark A/S.*
Denmark
129.1
Actavis Ireland Ltd.

Ireland
130.

Actavis Italy S.p.A.

Italy
131.

Actavis Isle of Man Ltd.

Isle of Man
132.

Actavis Nordic A/S
Denmark
133.

Actavis Oy
Finland
134.

UAB Actavis Baltics
Lithuania
135.

Actavis Holding AB
Sweden
LA_ LAN01:289784.8A
OC\2075745.21
CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER ALLERGAN TX 00037741

136.'
Actavis AB
Sweden
137.

Actavis Holding Germany GmbH
Germany
138.

Medis Pharma GmbH
Germany
139.

Actavis A/S
Denmark
140.

Actavis Norway AS
Norway
141.

Actavis, S. de. R.L. de C.V.

Mexico
142."
Actavis Pharma S. de R.L. de C.V.

Mexico
143.

Actavis Hungary Kft.

Hungary
144.

Arrow Pharm (Malta) Ltd.

Malta
145.

Medis Pharma BV
Netherlands
146.

PharmaPack International B.V.

Netherlands
147.

Actavis Polska Sp. z.o.o.

Poland
148.E
Actavis International Ltd.

Malta
149.

Actavis Malta Ltd.

Malta
150.

Actavis Export International Ltd.

Malta
151.E
Actavis Ltd. (Note: 1 share owned by Dr. Vella)
Malta
152.'
Actavis GmbH
Austria
153.

Actavis Holdings UK Ltd.

UK
154.

Actavis Holdings UK II Ltd.

UK
155.

Actavis UK Ltd.

UK
156.

Warner Chilcott Acquisition Limited
UK
157.

Chilcott UK Limited
Northern Ireland
158.=
Warner Chilcott Research Laboratories Ltd.

Northern Ireland
LA_ LAN01:289784.8A
OC\2075745.21
CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER ALLERGAN TX 00037742

159.E
Warner Chilcott UK Limited
Northern Ireland
160.

Warner Chilcott Pharmaceuticals UK Limited
UK
161.:

Millbrook (NI) Limited
Northern Ireland
162.:

Auden Mckenzie Holdings Ltd.

UK
163.

Auden Mckenzie (Pharma Division) Ltd.

UK
164.

NRIM Ltd.

UK
165.

Lime Pharma Ltd.

UK
166.

D3 Pharma Ltd. (38%)
UK
167.

Actavis d.o.o. Belgrade
Serbia
168.

Lotus Laboratories Private Ltd.

India
169.

Actavis Ukraine LLC
Ukraine
170..

Zdravlje AD
Serbia
171.

Actavis Switzerland AG
Switzerland
172.

Oncopharma AG
Switzerland
173.:

Sindan Pharma SRL
Romania
174.

Actavis SRL
Romania
175.

Actavis CZ a.s.

Czech Republic
176.E
Actavis S.r.o.

Slovak Republic
177.

Biovena Pharma Sp. z.o.o.

Poland
178.

Actavis (Cyprus) Ltd.

Cyprus
179.

Actavis Operations FOOD
Bulgaria
180.

Balkanpharma Troyan AD (98.32%)
Bulgaria
181.`
Balkanpharma Dupnitsa AD (98.05%)
Bulgaria
LA_ LAN01:289784.8A
OC\2075745.21
CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER ALLERGAN TX 00037743

182 t
Balkanpharma Security FOOD
Bulgaria
183.:

Balkanpharma Healthcare International (Cyprus) Ltd.*
Cyprus
184.

Actavis EAD
Bulgaria
185.

Actavis Istanbul Ilac Sanayive Ticaret Ltd. Sirketi
Turkey
186.

Actavis (MEEA) FZE
UAE
187.

Actavis Farmac&tica Limitada
Brazil
188.:

Actavis Holding Asia BV
Netherlands
189.

Actavis Hong Kong Limited
Hong Kong
190.:

China Medicinal & Chemical Industrial Development Group Ltd.

Hong Kong
(10% interest)
191.

Actavis Pharma Development Centre Private Ltd.

India
192.

Actavis Pharma Private Ltd.

India
193
PT Actavis Indonesia
Indonesia
194.

Actavis KK
Japan
195.

Actavis (Asia Pacific) Pte. Ltd.

Singapore
196.

Silom Medical Co., Ltd
Thailand
197.:

Silom Medical International Co., Ltd.

Thailand
198.

Forest Laboratories UK Ltd.

UK
199.

Pharmax Ltd.

UK
200.

Forest Pharma BV
Netherlands
201.

Forest Laboratories Osterreich GmbH
Austria
202.:

Forest Laboratories France S.A.S.

France
203
Forest Laboratories Deutschland GmbH
Germany
LA_ LAN01:289784.8A
OC\2075745.21
CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER ALLERGAN TX 00037744

204 t Forest Laboratories Italy S.r.L.
205. Forest Laboratories Spain, SL
206.E Axcan France (Invest) SAS
207. Aptalis Pharma SAS
208.: Forest Tosara Ltd.
209. Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc.
210. Watson Laboratories, Inc.
211.E Actavis Pharma, Inc.
212.1 Arrow International Ltd.
213. Allergan UK Group Ltd.
214. Actavis Finance eh£
215.: Actavis Holdco US, Inc.
* In Liquidation
LA_ LAN01:289784.8A
OC\2075745.21
* * De -Registered
Italy
Spain
France
France
Ireland
Delaware
Nevada
Delaware
Malta
UK
Iceland
Delaware
CONFIDENTIAL - SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER ALLERGAN TX 00037745

EXHIBIT K
Subdivision and Special District Settlement Participation Form Governmental Entity:

State:

Authorized Official:

Address l:

Address 2:

City, State, Zip:

Phone:

Email:

The governmental entity identified above ("Governmental Entity"), in order to obtain and in consideration for the benefits provided to the Governmental Entity pursuant to the Agreement dated November 22, 2022 ("Allergan Settlement"), and acting through the undersigned authorized official, hereby elects to participate in the Allergan Settlement, release all Released Claims against all Released Entities, and agrees as follows.

1. The Governmental Entity is aware of and has reviewed the Allergan Settlement, understands that all terms in this Election and Release have the meanings defined therein, and agrees that by this Election, the Governmental Entity elects to participate in the Allergan Settlement as provided therein.

2. Following the execution of this Settlement Participation Form, the Governmental Entity shall comply with Section III.B of the Allergan Settlement regarding Cessation of Litigation Activities.

3. The Governmental Entity shall, within fourteen (14) days of the Reference Date and prior to the filing of the Consent Judgment, file a request to dismiss with prejudice any Released Claims that it has filed. With respect to any Released Claims pending in In re National Prescription Opiate Litigation, MDL No. 2804, the Governmental Entity authorizes the MDL Plaintiffs' Executive Committee to execute and file on behalf of the Governmental Entity a Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice substantially in the form found at [link to national settlement website page to be provided].

4. The Governmental Entity agrees to the terms of the Allergan Settlement pertaining to Subdivisions and Special Districts as defined therein.

5. By agreeing to the terms of the Allergan Settlement and becoming a Releasor, the Governmental Entity is entitled to the benefits provided therein, including, if applicable, monetary payments beginning after the Effective Date.

6. The Governmental Entity agrees to use any monies it receives through the Allergan Settlement solely for the purposes provided therein.

K-1

7. The Governmental Entity submits to the jurisdiction of the court in the Governmental Entity's state where the Consent Judgment is filed for purposes limited to that court's role as provided in, and for resolving disputes to the extent provided in, the Allergan Settlement.

8. The Governmental Entity has the right to enforce the Allergan Settlement as provided therein.

9. The Governmental Entity, as a Participating Subdivision or Participating Special District, hereby becomes a Releasor for all purposes in the Allergan Settlement, including, but not limited to, all provisions of Section V (Release), and along with all departments, agencies, divisions, boards, commissions, Subdivisions, districts, instrumentalities of any kind and attorneys, and any person in their official capacity whether elected or appointed to serve any of the foregoing and any agency, person, or other entity claiming by or through any of the foregoing, and any other entity identified in the definition of Releasor, provides for a release to the fullest extent of its authority. As a Releasor, the Governmental Entity hereby absolutely, unconditionally, and irrevocably covenants not to bring, file, or claim, or to cause, assist in bringing, or permit to be brought, filed, or claimed, or to otherwise seek to establish liability for any Released Claims against any Released Entity in any forum whatsoever. The releases provided for in the Allergan Settlement are intended to be broad and shall be interpreted so as to give the Released Entities the broadest possible bar against any liability relating in any way to Released Claims and extend to the full extent of the power of the Governmental Entity to release claims. The Allergan Settlement shall be a complete bar to any Released Claim.

10. The Governmental Entity hereby takes on all rights and obligations of a Participating Subdivision or Participating Special District as set forth in the Allergan Settlement.

11. In connection with the releases provided for in the Allergan Settlement, each Governmental Entity expressly waives, releases, and forever discharges any and all provisions, rights, and benefits conferred by any law of any state or territory of the United States or other jurisdiction, or principle of common law, which is similar, comparable, or equivalent to § 1542 of the California Civil Code, which reads:

General Release; extent. A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release that, if known by him or her, would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party.

A Releasor may hereafter discover facts other than or different from those which it knows, believes, or assumes to be true with respect to the Released Claims, but each Governmental.

Entity hereby expressly waives and fully, finally, and forever settles, releases and discharges, upon the Effective Date, any and all Released Claims that may exist as of such date but which Releasors do not know or suspect to exist, whether through ignorance, oversight, error, negligence or through no fault whatsoever, and which, if known, would K-2

materially affect the Governmental Entities' decision to participate in the Allergan Settlement.

12. Nothing herein is intended to modify in any way the terms of the Allergan Settlement, to which the Governmental Entity hereby agrees. To the extent this Settlement Participation Form is interpreted differently from the Allergan Settlement in any respect, the Allergan Settlement controls.

I have all necessary power and authorization to execute this Settlement Participation Form on behalf of the Governmental Entity.

Signature:

Name:

Title:

Date:

K-3

EXHIBIT L
Settlement Fund Administrator
L-1

EXHIBIT M-1
Payment Schedule
EXHIBIT M-1: PAYMENT SCHEDULE
Payment Year
Additional -
Base Payments
Incentives
Incentive D
Incentive D
Total
Overall
Restitution
(45%)

A, B, & C
Part 1
Part 2
Abatement
Total
Amount & All
(maximum)
(maximum)
(maximum)
Attorneys' Fees
(48%)
(3.5%);
(3.5%)
& Costs Funds
Year 1
$55,774,789.29
$257,026,678.71
---
---
$257,026,678.71
$312,801,468.00
2023: Effective
---
Date + 30 days
Year 2
$55,774,789.29
$113,091,738.63
$143,934,940.08
---
---
$257,026,678.71
$312,801,468.00
July 15, 2024
Year 3
$55,774,789.27
$113,091,738.63
$143,934,940.08
---
---
$257,026,678.71
$312,801,467.98
July 15, 2025
Year 4
$55,774,789.27
$81,605,970.49
$143,934,940.08
$31,485,768.14
---
$257,026,678.71
$312,801,467.98
July 15, 2026
Year 5
---
$81,605,970.50
$143,934,940.08
$31,485,768.14
---
$257,026,678.72
$257,026,678.72
July 15, 2027
Year 6
---
$81,605,970.50
$1.43,934,940.08
---
$31,485,768.1.4
$257,026,678.72
$257,026,678.72
July 15, 2028
Year 7
---
$81,605,970.49
$1.43,934,940.08
---
$31,485,768.1.5
$257,026,678.72
$257,026,678.72
July 15, 2029
Total
$223,099,157.12
$809,634,037.95
$863,609,640.48
$62,971,536.28
$62,971,536.29
$1,799,186,751.00
$2,022,285,908.12
NOTES:

All figures for the base and incentive payments are maximum figures that reflect the following:

The credits amount of $350,686,276 for prior settlements, including San Francisco, have already been applied.

An assumption that all Eligible States are Settling States.

An assumption that all incentives are earned.

M-1

2. The Additional Restitution Amount and the state and subdivision fees and costs amounts are broken out into separate columns in Exhibit M-2.

3. Any offsets under Section Vll.0 for Non -Settling States would be deducted from the base payments and the maximum incentive payments (A, B & C and D) by subtracting from all payments the amount of the payment times the State Allocation Percentage assigned to each Non - Settling State in Exhibit F-2.

EXHIBIT M-2: PAYMENT SCHEDULE FOR FEE FUNDS, COST FUNDS AND ADDITIONAL RESTITUTION (Breakdown of Second Column in Exhibit M-1)
Payment Year
Attorney Fee and
State Cost Fund
State Outside
Additional
Total
Cost Fund
Counsel Fee Fund
Restitution
(Shown in Ex. M-1,
(Subdivisions)
Amount
2nd Column)
Year 1
2023: Effective Date
$46,778,855.53
$3,598,373.50
$2,698,780.13
$2,698,780.13
$55,774,789.29
+ 30 days
Year 2
$46,778,855.53
---
$4,497,966.88
$4,497,966.88
$55,774,789.29
July 15, 2024
Year 3
$46,778,855.52
---
$4,497,966.88
$4,497,966.87
$55,774,789.27
July 15, 2025
Year 4
$46,778,855.52
---
$4,497,966.87
$4,497,966.88
$55,774,789.27
July 15, 2026
Total
$187,115,422.10
$3,598,373.50
$16,192,680.76
$16,192,680.76
$223,099,157.12
M-2

M-3

EXHIBIT N
Additional Restitution Amount Allocation
Alabama

2.3235064275%
American Samoa

0.0249290899%
Arizona

3.4587568289%
Arkansas

1.3572625067%
California

14.4450765453%
Colorado

2.4192554291 %
Connecticut

1.8837281232%
District of Columbia

0.2620389205%
Guam

0.0699391581 %
Illinois

4.8429924684%
Indiana

3.2276944929%
Iowa

1.0802095029%
Kansas

1.1415833881%
Maine

0.7706700866%
Maryland

3.0729495134%
Massachusetts

3.3539006587%
Michigan

4.9531894399%
Minnesota

1.8887504448%
Missouri

2.9201303591%
Montana

0.4550557494%
N. Mariana Islands

0.0243230499%
Nebraska

0.6073579252%
New Hampshire

0.8422452854%
New Jersey

4.0113502576%
North Carolina

4.7322180042%
North Dakota

0.2475488543%
Oregon

2.0006852452%
Pennsylvania

6.6802688492%
South Carolina

2.2411620291%
Tennessee

3.9138188795%
Texas

9.1626320793%
Utah

1.6695130485%
Vermont

0.3705243381%
Virgin Islands

0.0459606175%
Virginia

3.3197424763%
Washington

3.3762173891%
Wisconsin

2.5599397925%
Wyoming

0.2428727457%
N-1

EXHIBIT O
Adoption of a State -Subdivision Agreement
A State -Subdivision Agreement shall be applied if it meets the requirements of Section VIII and is approved by the State and by the State's Subdivisions as follows:

Requirements for Approval. A State -Subdivision Agreement shall be deemed as agreed to when it has been approved by the State and either (a) Subdivisions whose aggregate "Population Percentages," determined as set forth below, total more than sixty percent (60%), or (b) Subdivisions whose aggregate Population Percentages total more than fifty percent (50%) provided that these Participating Subdivisions also represent fifteen percent (15%) or more of the State's counties or parishes (or, in the case of Settling States whose counties and parishes do not function as local governments, 15% of or more of the Settling State's non -county Subdivisions), by number.

2. Approval Authority. Approval by the State shall be by the Attorney General. Approval by a Subdivision shall be by the appropriate official or legislative body pursuant to the required procedures for that Subdivision to agree to a legally binding settlement.

3. Population Percentage Calculation. For purposes of this Exhibit O only, Population Percentages shall be determined as follows: For States with functional counties or parishes', the Population Percentage of each county or parish shall be deemed to be equal to (a) (1) two hundred percent (200%) of the population of such county or parish, minus (2) the aggregate population of all Primary Incorporated Municipalities located in such county or parish, divided by (b) two hundred percent (200%) of the State's population. A "Primary Incorporated Municipality" means a city, town, village or other municipality incorporated under applicable state law with a population of at least 25,000 that is not located within another incorporated municipality. The Population Percentage of each Primary Incorporated Municipality shall be equal to its population (including the population of any incorporated or unincorporated municipality located therein) divided by two hundred percent (200%) of the State's population; provided that the Population Percentage of a Primary Incorporated Municipality that is not located within a county shall be equal to two hundred percent (200%) of its population (including the population of any incorporated or unincorporated municipality located therein) divided by two hundred percent (200%) of the State's population. For all States that do not have functional counties or parishes, the Population Percentage of each non -county Subdivision i Certain states do not have counties or parishes that have functional governments, including Alaska, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

O-1

(including any incorporated or unincorporated municipality located therein), shall be equal to its population divided by the State's population.

4. Preexisting Agreements and Statutory Provisions. A State may include with the notice to its Subdivisions an existing agreement, a proposed agreement, or statutory provisions regarding the distribution and use of settlement funds and have the acceptance of such an agreement or statutory provision be part of the requirements to be an Initial Participating Subdivision.

5. Revised Agreements. A State -Subdivision Agreement that has been revised, supplemented, or refined shall be applied if it meets the requirements of Section VIII and is approved by the State and by the State's Subdivisions pursuant to the terms above.

O-2

EXHIBIT P
Iniunctive Relief
f � 7 91011a, 110 U1361f.�
A. "Health Care Provider(s)" means any physician or other health care practitioner who is licensed to provide health care services or to prescribe pharmaceutical medications and any medical facility, practice, hospital, clinic, pharmacy, or any other health facility that provides health care services or prescribes or dispenses pharmaceutical medications.

B. "In -Kind Support' means payment or assistance in the form of goods, commodities, services, or anything else of value.

C. "Lobby" and "Lobbying" shall have the same meaning as "lobbying activities" and "lobbying contacts" under the federal lobbying disclosure act, 2 U.S.C. § 1602 et seq., and any analogous state or local provisions governing the person or entity being lobbied. As used in this document, "Lobby" and "Lobbying" include Lobbying directly or indirectly, through grantees or Third Parties.

D. "Opioid(s)" means all naturally occurring, synthetic, or semisynthetic substances that interact with mu-opioid receptors primarily in the central nervous system and have demonstrated addictive properties.

E. "Opioid-Induced Side Effects Treatment Product(s)" shall mean any pharmaceutical product that has been approved by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration ("FDA") and expressly indicated for the treatment of a specified "Opioid-induced" side effect (such as Movantik® which is "an opioid antagonist indicated for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation"). The term "Opioid- Induced Side Effects Treatment Product(s)" shall not include pharmaceutical products that may treat medical conditions that may also be side effects of Opioids or Opioid Products or that may treat someone who uses or has a history of using Opioids or Opioid Products and was diagnosed with certain medical conditions (e.g., anxiety, depression, and Hepatitis C), unless the FDA approved indication states that it is approved to treat a specific "Opioid-induced" side effect by expressly referencing that the side effect was caused by an Opioid or Opioid Product (e.g., "Opioid-induced"). Also, by way of example, the term "Opioid- Induced Side Effects Treatment Product(s)" shall not include the following pharmaceutical medications: BOTOX®, CELEXA®, FETIZMA®, HUMIRA®, LEXAPRO®, LINZESS©, NIMBEXOO, ORIAHNN®, ORILISSA©, QULIPTA®, RINVOQ®, SAVELLA®, UBRELVY®, ULTANEV, ULTANE NOVAPLUS®, VIBERM), or VIEKIRA PAK©.

F. "Opioid Product(s)" means all past, current, and future medications containing Opioids approved by the FDA and listed by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency ("DEA") as Schedule 11, III, or IV drugs pursuant to the federal Controlled P-1

Substances Act (including but not limited to buprenorphine, codeine, fentanyl, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, meperidine, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, oxymorphone, tapentadol, and trainadol). The term "Opioid Product(s)" shall not include (1) methadone, buprenorphine, and other substances when used exclusively to treat opioid abuse, addiction, OUD, or overdose; or (2) raw materials, immediate precursors, and/or active pharmaceutical ingredients ("APIs") used in the manufacture or study of Opioids or Opioid Products, but only when such materials, immediate precursors, and/or APIs are sold or marketed exclusively to DEA- licensed manufacturers or DEA-licensed researchers. Also, by way of example, the terms "Opioid(s)" and "Opioid Product(s)" shall not include pharmaceutical medications that may relieve pain but not by interacting with mu-opioid receptors primarily in the central nervous system, such as BOTOXO, CELEXAO,

FETIZMAO, HUMIRAO, LEXAPROO, LINZESSO, NIMBEXO, ORIAHNNO,

ORILISSAO, QULIPTAO, RINVOQO, SAVELLAO, UBRELVYO, ULTANEO, ULTANE NOVAPLUSO, VIBERZIO, or VIEKIRA PAKO.

G. "OUD" means opioid use disorder defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), as updated or amended.

H. "Settling State" shall mean each State or United States territory that meets the participation requirements for becoming a Settling State under Section II of the Allergan Public Global Settlement Agreement and then participates in the Allergan Public Global Settlement Agreement.

I. `Promote," "Promoting," "Promotion," and "Promotional" shall mean dissemination of information or other practices intended or that could reasonably be anticipated to increase the sale, prescription, or utilization of prescription products or that attempt to influence prescribing practices or formulary decisions in the Settling States.

J. "Third Party(ies)" means any person or entity other than Allergan or a Releasor.

K. "Treatment of Pain" means the provision of therapeutic modalities to alleviate or reduce pain.

L. "Unbranded Information" means any information that does not identify a specific branded or generic product.

II. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
Allergan does not currently manufacture, sell, Promote, or Lobby for any Opioids or Opioid Products. As provided below, Allergan shall not manufacture, sell, Promote, or Lobby for any Opioids or Opioid Products in or for distribution in the Settling States or in a manner that directly affects the Settling States. However, the Parties acknowledge that certain Opioids or Opioid Products sold by Allergan prior to 2021 may still be circulating in the marketplace outside the possession and control of Allergan and the same is not a breach of any terms within this Exhibit P. Further, Allergan does not currently manufacture, sell, Promote, or Lobby for any Opioid- Induced Side Effects Treatment Products, and does not have any current intentions to do so in the P-2

future. For the avoidance of doubt, only the Settling States shall have the ability to enforce the terms of this Agreement.

For purposes of this Exhibit P only, Allergan means Allergan Finance, LLC (f/k/a Actavis, Inc., which, in turn, was f/k/a Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc.), Allergan Limited (f/k/a Allergan plc which, in turn, was f/k/a Actavis p1c), and AbbVie Inc., and each of their respective parents (as applicable), subsidiaries, successors, affiliates, and officers, directors, employees, representatives, and agents under the control of the foregoing.

A. Compliance Duration

1. Unless addressed in Section II.A.2 below, each term of Section II of this Exhibit P shall be effective for ten (10) years from the Effective Date and is limited to conduct that involves or affects the Settling States.

2. The provisions of Section II.H.1, Section II.H.2, and Section II.I shall not be subject to any term.

3. Nothing in this Exhibit P shall relieve Allergan of its independent obligation to fully comply with the laws of the Settling States before or after expiration of the injunction period specified in this subsection.

B. Ban on Selling and Manufacturing Opioids
Allergan shall not manufacture or sell any Opioids or Opioid Products for distribution in the Settling States. Allergan represents that Kadian® and Norco® were voluntarily discontinued by the end of 2020 and that the last inventory shipped will expire on or before June 30, 2023.

C. Ban on Promotion
Allergan shall not engage in Promotion of Opioids or Opioid Products, including but not limited to, by:
a. Employing or contracting with sales representatives, Health Care Providers, any Third Party, or other persons to Promote Opioids or Opioid Products to (i) Health Care Providers, (ii) patients, (iii) third - party payors (e.g., any entity, other than an individual, that pays or reimburses for the dispensing of prescription medicines, including but not limited to manage care organizations and pharmacy benefit managers), or (iv) persons involved in determining formulary access or treatment guidelines to Promote Opioids or Opioid Products; b. Using speakers, key opinion leaders, thought leaders, lecturers, and/or speaking events for Promotion of Opioids or Opioid Products;
P-3

C. Creating or distributing (directly or indirectly through Third Parties) Promotional materials (such as advertisements) that Promote Opioids or Opioid Products, including but not limited to brochures, newsletters, pamphlets, journals, books, guides, websites or internet advertisements, social media accounts or networks, and providing hyperlinks, engaging in internet search engine optimization, or otherwise directing internet traffic by improving rankings or making content appear among the top results in an internet search or otherwise be more visible or more accessible to the public on the internet to Promote Opioids or Opioid Products; and
d. Disseminating Unbranded Information (such as about a medical condition or disease state) that contains links to branded Promotional information about Opioids or Opioid Products or that generates data that Allergan uses to Promote Opioids or Opioid Products.

2. Allergan shall not engage in the following specific Promotion of Treatment of Pain to Promote Opioids or Opioid Products.
a. Allergan shall not Promote the Treatment of Pain to Promote Opioids, except that Allergan may continue to Promote the Treatment of Pain with non-Opioids.
b. Allergan shall not knowingly Promote the Treatment of Pain to Promote Opioids through Third Parties, except that Allergan may continue to Promote the Treatment of Pain with non-Opioids.

C. Allergan shall not Promote the concept that pain is undertreated to Promote Opioids or Opioid Products.
d. Allergan shall not knowingly Promote the concept that pain is undertreated through Third Parties to Promote Opioids or Opioid Products.

3. Allergan shall not engage in the following specific Promotion of Opioid- Induced Side Effects Treatment Products to Promote Opioids or Opioid Products.
a. Allergan shall not Promote Opioid-Induced Side Effects Treatment Products with or by referring directly to Opioids or Opioid Products (including with Unbranded Information).
b. Allergan shall not knowingly Promote Opioid-Induced Side Effects Treatment Products with or by referring directly to Opioids or Opioid Products through Third Parties.

C. Nothing in this section shall prevent Allergan from conveying the information contained in an FDA -approved label in the course of Promotion of Opioid-Induced Side Effects Treatment Products.

4. Section II.C.1-3 is not intended and shall not be interpreted to prohibit or restrict any and all discussions or references to Opioids or Opioid Products or any Allergan conduct (including Promotion) related to non-Opioid Products (including those that are approved for the Treatment of Pain or Opioid-Induced Side Effects Treatment Products) when doing so is not to Promote Opioids or Opioid Products, including, for example, (a) if certain patient populations, such as those with a history of abuse of Opioids or Opioid Products, are identified as having a higher prevalence of other conditions, such as Hepatitis C, or being appropriate candidates for treatment of those other conditions, (b) if such discussions or references relate to products that may treat medical conditions that may also be side effects of Opioids or Opioid Products (e.g., anxiety, depression, and Hepatitis C), and/or (c) if such discussions or references relate to the Promotion of BOTOX®, CELEXA®, FETIZMA®, HUMIRA®,
LEXAPRO®, LINZESS®, NIMBEXV, ORIAHNN®, ORILISSA®,
QULIPTA®, RINVOQ®, SAVELLAV, UBRELVY®, ULTANE®,
ULTANE NOVAPLUS®, VIBERZI®, or VIEKIRA PAK®.

5. Notwithstanding Sections ILC.1-3 directly above, Allergan may engage in non -Promotional conduct, including but not limited to the following:
a. Maintain a corporate website that includes Opioid Products on company's list of products that contains principally the following content: the FDA -approved package insert, medication guide, and labeling;
b. Maintain a product website for any Opioid Product that contains principally the following content: the FDA -approved package insert, medication guide, and labeling, and a statement directing patients or caregivers to speak with a licensed Health Care Provider; C. Provide the following factual information about Opioid Products sold by Allergan prior to 2021 which may still be circulating in the marketplace outside the possession and control of Allergan: an Opioid Product's NDC, SKU, or other relevant information such as formulation, package size, dosage, or pricing;
d. Provide or collect information or support the provision or collection of information as expressly required by law or any state or federal government agency with jurisdiction in the Settling State where the information is provided (including but not limited to collecting and/or reporting adverse events related to Opioid Products); P-5

e. Provide the following by mail, electronic mail, on or through Allergan's corporate or product websites, or through other electronic or digital methods: FDA -approved package insert, medication guide, and labeling for Opioid Products, or other prescribing information for Opioid Products that are published or approved by a state or federal government agency with jurisdiction in the Settling State where the information is provided; f. Provide scientific and/or medical information in response to an unsolicited request by a Health Care Provider consistent with FDA standards, rules, regulations, and/or guidance, including, but not limited to, Responding to Unsolicited Requests for Off -Label Information About Prescription Drugs and Medical Devices (Dec. 2011) as updated or amended by the FDA, and Guidance for Industry, Good Reprint Practices , for the Distribution of Medical Journal Articles and Medical or Scientific Reference Publications on Unapproved New Uses of Approved Drugs and Approved or Cleared Medical Devices (Jan. 2009) as updated or amended by the FDA;
g. Provide a response to any unsolicited question or request from a patient or caregiver, directing the patient or caregiver to the FDA - approved package insert, medication guide, and labeling for Opioid Products, to speak with a licensed Health Care Provider without describing the safety or effectiveness of any Opioid Product or naming any specific Health Care Provider, or to speak with their health insurance carrier regarding coverage of an Opioid Product; h. Provide Health Care Economic Information, as defined at 21 U.S.C. § 352(a), to a payor, formulary committee, or other similar entity with knowledge and expertise in the area of health care economic analysis consistent with FDA standards, rules, regulations, and/or guidance, including, but not limited to, FDA's Draft Questions and Answers Guidance for Industry and Review Staff, Drug and Device Manufacturer Communications With Payors, Formulary
Committees, and Similar Entities (Jan. 2018), as updated or amended by the FDA;
Conduct or provide financial support or In -Kind Support for bona fide scientific research; and
j. Draft, publish, or provide financial support or In -Kind Support for bona fide scientific publications.

6. To the extent that Allergan engages in conduct permitted by Section II.C.4 and 5 above, Allergan shall do so in a manner that is truthful, non - misleading, accurate, and non -deceptive.
[Me

D. No Financial Reward or Discipline Based on Volume of Opioid Product Sales

1. Allergan shall not provide financial incentives to its sales and marketing employees or discipline its sales and marketing employees based upon sales volume or sales quotas for Opioid Products.

2. Allergan shall not offer or pay any remuneration (including any compensation or rebate), directly or indirectly (e.g., through Third Parties), to any person in return for the prescribing, sale, use, or distribution of an Opioid Product (except to the extent a pre-existing contractual or legal requirement exists related to Opioid Products sold by Allergan before 2021).

E. Ban on Funding/Grants to Third Parties

1. Allergan shall not directly or indirectly provide financial support or In - Kind Support to any Third Party regarding conduct that Promotes Opioids or Opioid Products, including educational programs, brochures, newsletters, pamphlets, journals, books, guides, websites, or social media accounts or networks that Promote Opioids or Opioid Products, including Promoting Opioids or Opioid Products through the Promotion of Treatment of Pain, but excluding financial support otherwise required by this Exhibit P, a court order, a federal or state agency (e.g., FDA -approved Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMs)), or a federal or state law or regulation.

2. Allergan shall not directly or indirectly provide financial support or In - Kind Support to any Third Party for medical education programs to Promote Opioids or Opioid Products.

3. Allergan shall not create, sponsor, provide financial support or In -Kind Support to, or otherwise operate or control, any medical society or patient advocacy group related to conduct that Promotes Opioids or Opioid Products (including Promoting Opioids or Opioid Products through the Promotion of Treatment of Pain).

4. Allergan shall not provide links to any Third Party website or materials or otherwise distribute materials created by a Third Party for the purpose of Promoting Opioids or Opioid Products (including Promoting Opioids or Opioid Products through the Promotion of Treatment of Pain).

5. Allergan shall not use, assist, or employ any Third Party to engage in any activity that Allergan itself would be prohibited from engaging in pursuant to this Exhibit P. To the extent Allergan supports trade groups engaged in Lobbying, Allergan shall notify the trade groups at the time it makes its trade association payments that Allergan's support shall not be used to encourage the use of Opioids or Opioid Products or discourage the use of non-Opioids or Opioid Products for the purpose of indirectly encouraging P-7

the use of Opioids or Opioid Products (but shall not be responsible for how the trade group ultimately uses the support provided because it is outside of Allergan's control).

6. Allergan shall not enter into any contract or agreement with any person or entity or otherwise attempt to influence any person or entity in such a manner that has the purpose or foreseeable effect of limiting the dissemination of information regarding the risks and side effects of using Opioids or Opioid Products.

7. No officer or Vice President -level employee of Allergan may concurrently serve as a director, board member, employee, agent, or officer of any entity that primarily engages in conduct that Promotes Opioids or Opioid Products. Nothing in this provision shall preclude an officer or Vice President -level employee of Allergan from concurrently serving on the board of a hospital.

8. Allergan shall play no role in appointing persons to the board, or hiring persons to the staff, of any Third Party that primarily engages in conduct that Promotes Opioids or Opioid Products. For avoidance of doubt, nothing in this paragraph shall prohibit Allergan from fully and accurately responding to unsolicited requests or inquiries about a person's fitness to serve as an employee or board member at any such Third Party.

F. Lobbying Restrictions

1. Allergan shall not Lobby for the enactment of any federal, state, or local legislative or regulatory provision that:
a. Encourages or requires Health Care Providers to prescribe Opioids or Opioid Products or sanctions Health Care Providers for failing to prescribe Opioids or failing to treat pain with Opioids; b. Has the effect of limiting access to any non-Opioid alternative pain treatments; or
C. Pertains to the classification of any Opioid or Opioid Product as a scheduled drug under the Controlled Substances Act.

2. Allergan shall not Lobby against the enactment of any federal, state, or local legislative or regulatory provision that supports:
a. The use of non-pharmacologic therapy and/or non-Opioid pharmacologic therapy to treat chronic pain over or instead of Opioids or Opioid Products, including but not limited to Third Party payment or reimbursement for such therapies;
WZ

b. The use and/or prescription of immediate release Opioids or Opioid Products instead of extended -release Opioids or Opioid Products when an Opioid or Opioid Product is initiated, including but not limited to Third Party reimbursement or payment for such prescriptions;
The prescribing of the lowest effective dose of an Opioid or Opioid Product, including but not limited to Third Party reimbursement or payment for such prescriptions;
d. The limitation of initial prescriptions of Opioids or Opioid Products to treat acute pain;
The prescribing and other means of distribution of naloxone to minimize the risk of overdose, including but not limited to Third Party reimbursement or payment fornaloxone;
f. The use of urine testing before starting use of Opioids or Opioid Products and annual urine testing when Opioids or Opioid Products are prescribed, including but not limited to Third Party reimbursement or payment for such testing;
g. Evidence -based treatment (such as using medication -assisted treatment with buprenorphine or methadone in combination with behavioral therapies) for OUD, including but not limited to Third Party reimbursement or payment for such treatment; or
h. The implementation or use of disposal systems when solely related to Opioids or Opioid Products (versus of general applicability to all pharmaceutical medications, for example).

3. Allergan shall not Lobby against the enactment of any federal, state, or local legislative or regulatory provision expanding the operation or use of Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs ("PDMPs"), including but not limited to provisions requiring Health Care Providers to review PDMPs when Opioid Product use is initiated and with every prescription thereafter.

4. Notwithstanding the foregoing restrictions in Sections II.F.1-3, the following conductis not restricted:
a. Challenging the enforcement or interpretation of (including, but not limited to, suing for declaratory or injunctive relief) any laws, rules, or regulations;
b. Communications by Allergan in response to a law, rule, regulation, or order requiring such communication;
. •

C. Communications by an Allergan representative appearing before a federal or state legislative, administrative, or regulatory body, committee, or subcommittee as a result of a mandatory order or subpoena commanding that person or Allergan's designee to testify; d. Responding, in a manner consistent with this Exhibit P, to an unsolicited request for the input on the passage of legislation or the promulgation of any rule or regulation when such request is submitted in writing specifically to Allergan from a government entity directly involved in the passage of that legislation or promulgation of that rule or regulation; or
e. Lobbying for or against provisions of legislation, rule, or regulation that address subjects other than those identified in Sections II.F.1-3, so long as Allergan does not support specific portions of such legislation, rule, or regulation covered by Section II.F.1 or oppose specific portions of such legislation, rule, or regulation covered by Sections II.F.2-3. Allergan may Lobby for or against any legislation, rule, or regulation that may be covered by Sections II.F.1-3, if such legislation, rule, or regulation has general or specific provisions that affect medications beyond Opioids or Opioid Products, so long as Allergan's intent and purpose of doing so is not to Promote Opioids or Opioid Products.

G. Ban on Prescription Savings Programs

1. Allergan shall not directly or indirectly offer any discounts, coupons, rebates, or other methods which have the effect of reducing or eliminating a patient's co -payments or the cost of prescriptions (e.g., free trial prescriptions) for any Opioid Product (except to the extent a pre-existing contractual or legal requirement exists related to Opioid Products sold by Allergan before 2021).

2. Allergan shall not directly or indirectly provide financial support to any Third Party for discounts, coupons, rebates, or other methods which have the effect of reducing or eliminating a patient's co -payments or the cost of prescriptions (e.g., free trial prescriptions) for any Opioid Product (except to the extent a pre-existing contractual or legal requirement exists related to Opioid Products sold by Allergan before 2021).

3. Allergan shall not directly or indirectly assist patients or Health Care Providers with the claims and/or prior authorization process required for third -party payors to approve payment for any Opioid Product.

4. Allergan may directly or indirectly provide financial support or In -Kind Support for non-Opioids to any Third Party that provides patient assistance P-10

or support services for the purposes of helping patients afford and gain access to the medications prescribed to them.

H. General Terms

1. Allergan shall not make any written or oral statement about Opioids or any Opioid Product that is unfair, false, misleading, deceptive or unconscionable as defined under the law of the Settling States. For purposes of this paragraph, "Opioid Product" shall also include methadone, buprenorphine, and other substances when used exclusively to treat opioid abuse, addiction, or overdose.

2. Allergan shall not represent that Opioids or any Opioid Product(s) have approvals, characteristics, uses, benefits, or qualities that they do not have.

For purposes of this paragraph, "Opioid Product" shall also include methadone, buprenorphine, and other substances when used exclusively to treat opioid abuse, addiction, or overdose.

3. This Exhibit P shall not be construed or used as a waiver or limitation of any defense otherwise available to Allergan or any Released Entity in any action, and nothing in this Exhibit P is intended to or shall be construed to prohibit Allergan or any Released Entity in any way whatsoever from taking legal or factual positions with regard to any Opioid Products in prosecution or defense of litigation or other legal proceedings.

4. Upon the request of the Attorney General of any Settling State, Allergan shall provide the Attorney General with copies of the following, within forty -Eve (45) days of the request:
a. Any litigation or civil or criminal law enforcement subpoenas or CID relating to Allergan's Opioid Product(s) that Allergan received after the Effective Date of the Agreement; and
b. Warning or untitled letters issued by the FDA regarding Allergan's Opioid Product(s) and all correspondence between Allergan and the FDA related to such letters that Allergan received after the Effective Date of the Agreement.

5. Nothing in this Exhibit P shall be construed to limit or impair Allergan's ability to:
a. Communicate its positions and/or respond to media inquiries concerning litigation, investigations, or other proceedings or matters relating to Allergan or its Opioid Products.
b. Maintain a website explaining its litigation positions and responding to allegations concerning Allergan or its Opioid Products.

P-11

L Compliance with All State Laws and Regulations Relating to the Sale, Promotion, and Distribution of Any Opioid Product

1. Allergan shall comply with all applicable State laws and regulations that relate to the sale, Promotion, distribution, and disposal of Opioids or Opioid Products in the Settling States, provided that nothing in this paragraph requires Allergan to violate federal law or regulations, including but not limited to:
a. State Controlled Substances Act, including all guidance issued by the applicable state regulator(s);
b. State Consumer Protection Laws; and
C. State laws, regulations, and guidelines related to the prescribing, distribution, and disposal of Opioid Products.

I Clinical Data Transparency

1. Allergan agrees to make available to an independent Third -Party data center or platform owner (e.g., Vivli) anonymized clinical data generated from Allergan-sponsored Phase II -IV interventional clinical studies —regardless of whether that data was submitted to a regulatory authority (e.g., FDA) for branded opioid drugs that are Opioids or Opioid Products that have received an initial marketing authorization from a regulatory authority to the extent Allergan conducts a reasonable, good faith investigation to locate any such data and it is in Allergan's possession. Anonymized clinical data includes:
a. Full analyzable data set(s) (including individual participant -level data de -identified);
b. The clinical study report(s) redacted for commercial or personal identifying information;
C. The full protocol(s) (including the initial version, final version, and all amendments); and

2. Full statistical analysis plan(s) (including all amendments and documentation for additional work processes); and Dataset Specifications, which describe the available dataset variables (such as age, race, blood pressure, lab values, etc.).

3. The independent Third Party will facilitate the disclosure of such clinical data to qualified researchers with a bona fide scientific research proposal as reviewed and approved by an independent review panel for scientific merit consistent with the panel's assessment criteria and pursuant to an agreed upon data use agreement.

P-12

4. Allergan shall not interfere with decisions made by the staff or reviewers associated with the independent Third -Party data center or platform owner.

5. Allergan shall bear all costs for making clinical data available pursuant to Section II.J.1 of this Exhibit P.

III. DOCUMENT DISCLOSURE
A. Documents Subject to Public Disclosure
The following documents must be provided to each Settling State and are subject to public disclosure in perpetuity, except for the redactions authorized by section B:

All Allergan-produced documents admitted as trial exhibits in In re Opioid Litigation, Index No. 400000/2017 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Suffolk County), The City and County of San Francisco, California and the People of the State of California, acting by and through San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al., Case No. 3:18-cv-07591 (N.D. Cal.), The State of West Virginia ex rel. Patrick Morrisey, Attorney General v. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., et al., Civil Action No. 19-C-104 BNE (W.

Va. Cir. Ct., Boone County), or The People of the State of California, acting by and through Santa Clara County Counsel James R. Williams, Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas, Los Angeles County Counsel Mary C. Wickham, and Oakland City Attorney Barbara J. Parker v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al., Case No. 30-2014-00725287-CU-BT-CXC (Cal. Super.

Ct., Orange County), together with complete trial transcripts.

2. All Allergan deposition transcripts, and exhibits from or produced in the matters identified in subsection III.A.1, as well as in In re Nat'l Prescription Opiate Litig., No. 1:17-and-02804 (N.D. Ohio).

3. All summary judgment filings, proposed findings of fact and law, and expert reports relating to the claims against Allergan that were filed in the matters identified in subsections III.A.1 and III.A.2, together with related exhibits.

4. All documents provided under this provision must be provided in an appropriate electronic format with appropriate metadata.

5. In addition, Allergan shall not object to public disclosure of the following documents, without further redaction: Acquired_Actavis_00000001- Acquired_Actavis_02689490.

B. Information That Allergan May Redact
The following categories of information are exempt from public disclosure:

P-13

a. Information subject to trade secret protection. A "trade secret" is information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique or process, that (a) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to the public or to other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure and use; and (b) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy. Even if the information falls within the definition, "trade secret" does not include information reflecting sales or promotional strategies, tactics, targeting, or data, or internal communications related to sales or promotion or information in documents dated more than five (5) years before the disclosure required by this section.
b. Confidential personal information. "Confidential personal information" means individual Social Security or tax identification numbers, personal financial account numbers, passport numbers, driver license numbers, home addresses, home telephone numbers, personal email addresses, and other personally identifiable information protected by law from disclosure. "Confidential personal information" does not include the names of Allergan's officers, directors, employees, consultants, agents, or attorneys or of prescribers or of officials of a government agency.

C. Information that is inappropriate for public disclosure because it is subject to personal privacy interests recognized by law (e.g., HIPAA), or contractual rights of third parties that Allergan may not abrogate.
d. Information regarding Allergan employees' personal matters unrelated to Allergan, including emails produced by Allergan custodians discussing vacation or sick leave, family, or other personal matters.
e. Information that is protected by the attorney —client or attorney work product privilege.
f. Financial documents designated as "Highly Confidential" or "Highly Confidential Information" under Case Management Order No. 2 in In re Nat'l Prescription Opiate Litig., No. 1:17-and-02804 (N.D. Ohio) and produced in response to the April 3, 2019.Ruling Regarding Jurisdictional Discovery on Defendants Allergan, Teva, and Mallinckrodt, including tax returns including all schedules and attachments, policies regarding accounting, and annual reports.

C. Redaction of Documents Containing Protected Information P-14

Whenever a document contains information subject to a claim of exemption pursuant to section B, Allergan will provide the document in redacted form.

Such redactions must indicate that trade secret and/or private information, as appropriate, has been redacted. Redactions are limited to the minimum redactions possible, consistent with section B.

2. Allergan must provide to each Settling State a log noting each document redacted. The log must also provide fields stating the basis for redacting the document, with sufficient detail to allow an assessment of the merits of the assertion. The log is subject to public disclosure in perpetuity. The log shall be provided by the production deadline.

3. In addition to the redacted documents, Allergan shall, upon any Settling State's request, also produce all documents identified in subsection III.A above in unredacted form to such Settling State at the same time, but only to the extent the document was produced by Allergan in an unredacted form in the underlying litigation, and only for the purpose of permitting a merits assessment and potential challenge of the redaction pursuant to Section IV herein.

D. Public Disclosure Through a Document Repository
Each Settling State may publicly disclose all documents covered by this section through a public repository maintained by a governmental, non- profit, or academic institution. Each Settling State may specify the terms of any such repository's use of those documents, including allowing the repository to index and make searchable all documents subject to public disclosure, including the metadata associated with those documents.

E. Timeline for Production
Allergan shall produce all documents required by Section A within nine months from the Effective Date.

F. Support Payment
Within thirty (30) calendar days of the Effective Date, Allergan will make one-time payments totaling $1,375,000 to the University of California, San Francisco Foundation (UCSF Foundation) and The Johns Hopkins University, to be used to support a public repository of documents subject to this section.

IV. ENFORCEMENT
A. For the purposes of resolving disputes with respect to compliance with Exhibit P, should any of the Settling States have reason to believe that Allergan has violated a provision of Exhibit P, then such Settling State shall notify Allergan in writing of the specific objection, identify with particularity the provisions of Exhibit P that R

the practice appears to violate, and give Allergan thirty (30) days to respond to the notification ("Response Period").

B. Upon receipt of written notice from any of the Settling States, Allergan shall provide a written response to the Settling State's notification, containing either a statement explaining why Allergan believes it is in compliance with Exhibit P, or a detailed explanation of how the alleged violation occurred and a statement explaining how and when Allergan intends to remedy or has remedied the alleged violation. Allergan may request a reasonable amount of additional time to cure any violation through such remedial measures ("Cure Period") and the Settling State shall not unreasonably withhold approval of such request.

C. The Settling State may not take any action concerning the alleged violation of Exhibit P during the Response and Cure Periods. Nothing shall prevent the Settling State from agreeing in writing to provide Allergan with additional time beyond the thirty (30) days to respond to the notice. However, the Settling State may take any action, including, but not limited to legal action to enforce compliance with the Consent Judgment, without delay if the Settling State believes that a threat to the health or safety of the public requires immediate action.

D. The Settling State may bring an action against Allergan to enforce the terms of Exhibit P, but only after providing Allergan an opportunity to respond to the notification and, if agreed upon, a period to cure any violation, as described above, or within any other period as agreed to by Allergan and the Settling State.

E. Nothing in this Consent Judgment shall be interpreted to limit any Settling State's Civil Investigative Demand ("CID") or investigative subpoena authority, to the extent such authority exists under applicable state law.

F. Nothing herein shall be construed to exonerate any failure to comply with any provision of Exhibit P after the Effective Date, or to compromise the authority of any Settling State to take action for any failure to comply with Exhibit P, consistent with this section.

P-16

EXHIBIT Q
[Intentionally Omitted]
Q-1

EXHIBIT R
Agreement on Attorneys' Fees, Costs, and Expenses
This Agreement on Attorneys' Fees, Expenses, and Costs ("Fee Agreement") is entered between Teva, Allergan, and the Plaintiffs' Executive Committee appointed in the multidistrict litigation in the Northern District of Ohio, In re National Prescription Opiate Litigation, No. 1:17- md-02804 ("MDL PEC"), in connection with the Teva Global Opioid Settlement Agreement ("Teva Agreement") and the Allergan Public Global Opioid Settlement Agreement ("Allergan Agreement"). This Fee Agreement becomes effective on the Effective Date of the Teva Agreement and Allergan Agreement or the date that the Consent Judgments anticipated under the Teva Agreement and Allergan Agreement become final in 25 Settling States (whichever is later).

I. Definitions
A. This Fee Agreement incorporates all defined terms in the Teva Agreement and Allergan Agreement, unless otherwise defined herein, and shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the Teva Agreement and Allergan Agreement.

B. "Allergan. " Allergan Finance, LLC (f/k/a Actavis, Inc., which, in turn, was f/k/a/ Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) and Allergan Limited (f/k/a Allergan plc, which, in turn, was f/k/a Actavis plc). Allergan does not include Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. ("Teva Ltd."), Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. ("Teva USA"), Cephalon, Inc. ( "Cephalon "), Actavis LLC (f/k/a Actavis Inc.) ("Actavis LLC"), Watson Laboratories, Inc. ( "Watson "), Actavis Pharma, Inc. (f/k/a Watson Pharma, Inc.) ("Actavis Pharma "), Actavis Elizabeth LLC ("Actavis Elizabeth"), Actavis Kadian LLC ("Actavis Kadian "), Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc. (f/k/a Watson Laboratories, Inc. - Florida) ( "Actavis Labs FL "), Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc. (f/k/a Watson Laboratories, Inc. - Utah) ("Actavis Labs UV), Actavis Mid Atlantic LLC ("Actavis Mid"), Actavis South Atlantic LLC ("Actavis South Actavis Totowa LLC ("Actavis Totowa "), or Anda, Inc. (Anda ").

C. "Applicant." Any Attorney or MDL Participating Counsel who seeks an award of attorneys' fees from the Attorney Fee Fund pursuant to the procedures established by the MDL Court and the Fee Panel.

D. "Attorney." Any of the following retained through a legal contingency fee or hourly fee contract: a solo practitioner, multi -attorney law firm, or other legal representative of a Participating Subdivision or MDL Participating Counsel. This does not include Subdivision in-house attorneys.

E. "Attorney Fee Fund." An account consisting of funds allocated to pay attorneys' fees approved pursuant to Section III of this Fee Agreement established by Order of and under the ongoing jurisdiction of the MDL Court, as provided below.

F. "Common Benefit." Work performed for the benefit of all Participating Subdivisions or Tribal. Nations, including, but not limited to, pretrial matters, R-1

discovery, trial preparation, trial, settlement negotiations, and all other work that advances the interests of the Participating Subdivisions.

G. "Common Benefit Fund." The sub fund of the Attorney Fee Fund described in subsection III.E.

H. "Contingency Fee Fund." The sub fund of the Attorney Fee Fund described in subsection III.F.

I. "Cost and Expense Fund Administrator." The administrator appointed by the MDL Court on August 12, 2021 (MDL Docket No. 3828), to administer the Cost Fund and its sub funds as provided in the Fee Agreement.

J. "Court Common Benefit Fund." The Common Benefit Fund established by the MDL Court in its orders of July 22, 2021, MDL Docket No. 3794, and May 9, 2022, MDL Docket No. 4428.

K. "Fee Entitlement." Any right, entitlement, or expectation, including but not limited to a fee contract, contingent fee contract, agreement, referral arrangement, co - counsel arrangement, State Back -Stop agreement, or any other arrangement by which counsel could receive compensation or other consideration. For the avoidance of doubt, the scope of Fee Entitlement under subparagraph III.G.3.a does not include any Attorneys' fees associated with representation of a State.

L. "Fee Panel." The three -person panel appointed by the MDL Court on August 12, 2021 (MDL Docket No. 3828), to administer and make recommendations for the allocation and distribution of the Attorney Fee Fund and its sub funds as provided in the Fee Agreement.

M. "Later Litigating State." A State that first files a lawsuit bringing a Released Claim against a Released Entity after the Preliminary Agreement Date.

N. "MDL Court." United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio Eastern Division, Case No. 1:17-md-02804, Judge Dan Aaron Polster.

O. "MDL Direct Cost Fund." The cost fund described in subparagraph II.A.3.a below.

P. "MDL Participating Counsel." MDL Participating Counsel includes an attorney or firm authorized by MDL 2804 Lead Counsel to perform work for the Common Benefit of Participating Subdivisions. By way of example, it would include insurance counsel and appellant counsel.

Q. "MDL PEC." The Plaintiffs' Executive Committee appointed by the MDL Court.

R. "Non -Participating Litigating Subdivision." A Litigating Subdivision that is not a Participating Subdivision.

S. "Non -Participating State." A State that is not a Participating State.

R-2

T. "Participating Litigating Subdivision." A Litigating Subdivision that is also a Participating Subdivision.

U. "Participation Agreement." An agreement executed by an Attorney that acknowledges the obligation to pay an appropriate MDL Common Benefit Assessment.

V. "Qualified Tribal Representation." Representation by an attorney of a Participating Tribal Government regarding Released Claims against Released Entities. Such counsel are eligible for Common Benefit Fee consideration. The Teva Tribal Global Settlement and the Allergan Tribal Global Settlement will provide for the contribution to the Common Benefit Fund as determined by the MDL Court.

W. "Qualifying Representation." Legal services provided for representation of the MDL PEC or Participating Litigating Subdivision regarding Released Claims against Released Entities.

X. "State Back -Stop Agreement." Any agreement by a Settling State and private counsel for Participating Subdivisions in that State (or legislation enacted in that State) to provide, adjust, or guarantee attorneys' fees and costs, whether from the Attorney Fee Fund or any other source recognized in the agreement or legislation.] Y. "Subdivision Cost and Expense Fund. " The fund created to pay approved Subdivision and Tribal Nations costs and expenses as set forth in subparagraph II.A.3.b.

Z. "Teva" means (i) Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. and (ii) all of its respective past and present direct or indirect parents, subsidiaries, divisions, affiliates, joint ventures, predecessors, successors, assigns, including but not limited to Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., the Actavis Generic Entities, and Anda Inc.

IL MDL Direct Cost Fund and Subdivision Cost and Expense Fund ("Cost Fund") A. The total Cost Fund shall be $30 million dollars funded as set forth below.

1. Total cost to be paid by Teva in each of the relevant Payment Years under this Agreement shall be up to the following amounts, subject to the provisions set forth below:

Cost Fund
1 Nothing herein shall be understood to indicate approval for additional State Back -Stop Agreements or modifications of existing State Back -Stop Agreements.
2 Payment Year shall have the same meaning for Teva as set forth in the Teva Agreement and Teva Exhibits M-1 and M-3. Payment Year shall carry the same definition for Allergan as set forth in the Allergan Agreement and Allergan Exhibits M-1 and M-2.

R-3

Payment
$9 000,000.00
Year 1
'
Payment
$9 000,000.00
Year 2
'

2. Total cost to be paid by Allergan in each of the relevant Payment Years under this Agreement shall be up to the following amounts, subject to the provisions set forth below:

Cost Fund
Payment
$6,000,000.00
Year 1
Payment
$6 000,000.00
Year 2
'

3. The Cost Fund shall be split into the MDL Direct Cost Fund and the Subdivision Cost and Expense Fund.
a. The MDL Direct Cost Fund shall be Seven Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($7,500,000), payable 50% in Year One, and 50% in Year Two. The MDL Direct Cost Fund shall make payment without any delay to reimburse the MDL PEC for an agreed -to portion of the expenses incurred, provided the costs have been approved by the Cost and Expense Fund Administrator appointed by the Court. The MDL Direct Cost Fund will be paid directly to the MDL Opiate Capital Account. The Cost and Expense Fund Administrator may include costs incurred by the MDL PEC in furtherance of litigation, mediation, implementation, and management of the Settlements.
b. The Subdivision Cost and Expense Fund shall be Twenty -Two Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($22,500,000), payable 50% in Year One and 50% in Year Two.

C. It is the intention of the Parties that the Cost Fund shall be administered by the Cost Fund and Expense Fund Administrator (MDL Docket No. 3828), who will be governed by the provisions of this Agreement and shall design the process and procedures for the allocation of costs pursuant to this Agreement and the MDL Court's Order.
d. The costs of the Cost and Expense Fund Administrator shall be paid from the Cost Fund and allocated by the Cost and Expense Fund Administrator between the MDL Direct Cost Fund and the
WEA

Subdivision Cost and Expense Fund to fairly charge each fund the cost incurred in implementing and supervising the specific fund. e. The Cost and Expense Fund Administrator shall set the process and procedures for submission of and criteria for applications for payment of Subdivisions' and Tribal Nations' costs and expenses.

The Cost and Expense Fund Administrator shall receive and evaluate applications from Participating Litigating Subdivisions and litigating Tribal Nations, whether filed in Federal Court or State Court, to seek reimbursement for eligible costs in pursuit of claims against Allergan or Teva. The process shall require a showing that the costs or expenses sought were reasonably incurred in furtherance of active litigation of a designated state or federal bellwether trial - set case, or Common Benefit. The Cost and Expense Fund
Administrator shall require transparency from all applicants as to any other sources for compensating Attorneys for Subdivisions and Tribal Nations for costs incurred. If funds remain after the reimbursement of approved out-of-pocket costs, the Cost and Expense Fund Administrator may consider reasonable and
appropriate payment for client time, costs, or expenses incurred by recognized trial bellwether plaintiffs. At the conclusion of the process, any funds not allocated by the Cost and Expense Fund Administrator shall be transferred to the Common Benefit Fund established in this Exhibit R.

4. In the event that States and Subdivisions enter into an additional global settlement with a party or parties other than Teva or Allergan that is (a) under the jurisdiction of the MDL Court in MDL No. 2804, (b) creates a separate cost fund, and (c) unless the parties agree to another date, such agreement has an effective date prior to June 30, 2023, the Cost and Expense Fund Administrator shall have the authority to aggregate the Cost Fund with the cost fund created under that global settlement agreement. The Cost and Expense Fund Administrator shall have the authority to address the appropriate procedures and required information to allow the costs to be funded from the appropriate cost fund or shared by two or more cost funds.

M. Attorney Fee Fund
A. An Attorney Fee Fund shall be paid in the following amounts and years:

Teva Shall Pay
Allergan Shall Pa
Payment
Year I
$ 46,215,837.93
$ 40,778,855.53
Payment
Year 2
$ 46,215,837.93
$ 40,778,855.53
Payment
$ 55,215,837.92
$ 46,778,855.53
Year 3
R-5

Payment
Year 4
$ 55,215,83792
$ 46,778,855.53
Payment
Year 5
$ 55,215,83792
$ 0.00
Payment
Year 6
$ 55,215,83792
$ 0.00
B. The Attorney Fee Fund shall consist of the Contingency Fee Fund and the Common Benefit Fund.

2. It is the intention of the Parties that the Contingency Fee Fund and the Common Benefit Fund shall be administered by the Fee Panel (MDL Docket No. 3828), which will be governed by the provisions of this Fee Agreement and shall design the process and procedures for the allocation of fees pursuant to this Fee Agreement and the MDL Court's Order.

C. The fees to be paid under this Fee Agreement are available for Attorneys engaged in Qualifying Representations and Qualified Tribal Representations only. Fees to be paid under this Fee Agreement are not available prior to the Effective Date of the Teva Agreement and Allergan Agreement or if the Teva Agreement does not proceed past Teva's determination in subsection XLA of the Teva Agreement or if the Allergan Agreement does not proceed past Allergan's determination in subsection X.A of the Allergan Agreement. Fees to be paid under this Fee Agreement are not available for representation of States, Non -Participating Subdivisions or Non -Litigating Subdivisions and are not available for representation of private hospitals, third -party payors, NAS claimants, personal injury/wrongful death claimants, or any entity other than Participating Litigating Subdivisions. In addition, fees under this Fee Agreement are not available for representation of any individual or entity in matters other than those claims against Released Entities, but may include a reasonable share of representations that involve development of facts for pursuit of opioid-related claims against multiple defendants in the pharmacy, manufacturing, and distribution chain.

D. Attorney Fee Fund and Sub Funds.

There shall be a split of the Attorney Fee Fund into the Contingency Fee Fund and the Common Benefit Fund. The split shall be 40% to the Contingency Fee Fund and 60% to the Common Benefit Fund.

2. In no event shall Teva or Allergan be required to pay more into the Attorney Fee Fund in any Payment Year than the maximum amount specified for that Payment Year in subsection III.A., which amounts are reflected in Exhibit M to the Teva Agreement and Allergan Agreement. The amounts allocated to the Contingency Fee Fund and the Common Benefit Fund set by the Fee Panel shall be subject to the reductions and offsets set forth below. two

3. Awards of fees from the Contingency Fee Fund shall be available to Attorneys with Qualifying Representations of Participating Litigating Subdivisions eligible to receive an allocation under the Teva Agreement and Allergan Agreement, as set forth in Exhibits F-2 and G to the Teva Agreement and Exhibits F and G to the Allergan Agreement, and shall be made applying the Mathematical Model attached as Exhibit "A" to this Fee Agreement. The collection of the data and calculations for the Mathematical Model has been a cooperative effort among private counsel for a large number of Litigating Subdivisions. The analysis has been spearheaded by Joseph Tann and Andrew Arnold. The Fee Panel is encouraged to continue working with those counsel in application of the Model. The Fee Panel shall oversee the application of the Model and resolve any questions or disputes concerning the eligibility of a Counsel to participate as required in subsection IILG. The Panel is empowered to hear disputes concerning and ensure the accuracy of the mathematical calculation.

4. As to awards from the Contingency Fee Fund, there shall be no right of appeal.

5. Any appeal of an award of the Fee Panel from the Common Benefit Fund will be made to the MDL Court and be reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard.

E. Common Benefit Fund (60% of the Attorney Fee Fund).

1. Funds in the Attorney Fee Fund shall be allocated to the Common Benefit Fund according to the schedule set forth below, subject to the adjustments described in paragraph III.E.6. The payments are to be made on the following yearly schedule, subject to the adjustments set forth below:

Teva Shall. Pay
Allergan Shall Pa
Payment
$ 27 729,502.76
$ 24,467,313.32
Year 1
Payment
$ 27 729,502.76
$ 24,467,313.32
Year 2
Payment
$ 33,129,502.75
$ 28,067,313.32
Year 3
Payment
$ 33,129,502.75
$ 28,067,313.32
Year 4
Payment
$ 33,129,502.75
$ 0.00
Year 5
Payment
$ 33,129,502.75
$ 0.00
Year 6

2. The Common Benefit Fund shall be available to compensate Attorneys engaged in Qualifying Representations of Participating Litigating R-7

Subdivisions and Qualified Tribal Representation of Tribal Participating Governments who:
a. have performed work for the Common Benefit of all Participating Subdivisions and/or Tribal Nations consistent with the provisions to the guidelines established by Judge Polster set forth in MDL 2804 and the May 1, 2018 Order, under docket number 358, which is incorporated herein by reference; and
b. satisfy the eligibility criteria set forth in subsection III.G.

3. For purposes of Common Benefit Fund distribution, Attorneys representing Tribal Nations litigating against Teva or Allergan have also reached a settlement for Released Claims with Teva and Allergan. These settlements shall be the subject of separate agreements with Teva and Allergan.

Attorneys representing Tribal Nations are eligible for Common Benefit consideration, provided such agreements with Teva and Allergan become effective under their terms. Such Attorneys must meet the eligibility criteria in subsection III.G.

4. For purposes of Common Benefit Fund distribution, MDL Participating Counsel not engaged in Qualifying Representations of Participating Litigating Subdivisions but who performed work for the Common Benefit pursuant to authorization from the MDL Co -Leads and meet the eligibility criteria in subsection III.G shall be eligible.

5. The Common Benefit Fund shall be overseen by the Fee Panel, which shall determine the allocation of funds to eligible Attorneys consistent with this Fee Agreement and the May 1, 2018 Order.

6. In assessing the benefits that an Applicant has conferred to Participating Subdivisions (including non -Litigating Subdivisions) and/or Tribes for purposes of any compensation decision, the Fee Panel shall give significant weight to the extent to which (i) the Applicant and his or her clients have contributed to increasing (or reducing) the Initial Participation in the Teva Agreement or the Allergan Agreement, and (ii) the Applicant and his or her clients have contributed to increasing (or reducing) the amounts achieved under Incentive Payments A-D through participation in the Teva Agreement, including the Teva Tribal Agreement, or the Allergan Agreement, including the Allergan Tribal Agreement. The Fee Panel shall also consider additional fee recoveries the Applicant may potentially obtain, including, but not limited to, from attorney fee funds under other settlement agreements, State Back -Stop Agreements, representations of States or Tribal Nations, representations of other clients in opioids-related matters, or through the representation of Subdivision clients, whether they participated in the Teva Agreement or Allergan Agreement or not. It is the intent of this provision to recognize that the goal of the Teva Agreement

and Allergan Agreement is to provide for maximum participation by the Subdivisions, maximum abatement funding for all Subdivisions nationally, and the maximum peace for Released Entities. Therefore, representing one or more Non -Participating States or Non -Participating Subdivisions does not further the goal of the Teva Agreement or Allergan Agreement, and should not be considered Common Benefit because it does not increase funds available to Participating Subdivisions' abatement programs.

Representing one or more Later Litigating States or Later Litigating Subdivisions is antithetical to the Teva Settlement and the Allergan Agreement and detracts from Common Benefit. The Fee Panel shall consider this concept of "common detriment" set forth in this paragraph in all of its decision making with respect to the allocation of the Attorney Fee Fund among Applicants, as well as, in its discretion, any offsets provided to Teva or Allergan as set forth in subsection III.H. The Fee Panel shall consider the totality of the Applicant's Participating Litigating Subdivisions as compared to the Applicant's Non -Participating Litigating Subdivisions; the Parties recognize that, although the goal is for 100% participation, Applicants with a greater number of clients have a greater probability of having one or more Non -Participating Litigating Subdivisions. As used in this paragraph, "client" or "representing" a Subdivision shall include any Litigating Subdivision as to which the Applicant has a Fee Entitlement.

7. As set forth in subsection III.H, the Fee Panel must consider the factors described in paragraph III.E.6 to determine how and whether to reduce the amounts to be paid by Teva or Allergan under this Fee Agreement and to determine how to allocate funds among Applicants. They may also, at their discretion, consider other factors. Any reduction in payment obligation or credit to be given Teva or Allergan in this Fee Agreement shall be applied against the last Payment Year for that defendant and working backwards.

Any reduction to an Applicant not credited to Teva or Allergan shall be allocated to attorneys whose Litigating Subdivision clients participated in the settlement by the Initial Participation Date.

8. The MDL PEC will seek, and the Attorneys General for Settling States, Teva, and Allergan, will not oppose, a Common Benefit Fee Order requiring an assessment of 7.5% on the gross recovery (by judgment or settlement) of any Non -Participating Subdivision that is subject to the federal court jurisdiction, represented by a MDL PEC firm, represented by any Attorney receiving fees from the Common Benefit Fund, represented by any Attorney that signed a Participation Agreement or paid in a case otherwise under the jurisdiction of the MDL Court.

9. If Teva and Allergan agree to go forward with their respective Agreements under subsections [XI.A and X.A] of their respective Agreements, they shall pay the full Common Benefit (60%) Fee into the Common Benefit Fund without regard to the number of Settling States or Participating Subdivisions. Should Teva and/or Allergan pay a judgment to, or settle

with, a Non -Participating State or a Non -Participating Litigating Subdivision subsequent to the Reference Date, and such settlement or judgment results in a common benefit fee assessment paid into the Common Benefit Fund or the Court Common Benefit Fund, the following shall apply:
a. Teva or Allergan shall be credited dollar -for -dollar for the amount paid for the fee assessment up to 7.5% of the abatement amount derived from the application of the State Global Allocation Percentage as set forth in Exhibit F-1 or the abatement amount derived from the application of the Subdivision and Special District Allocation Percentage as set forth in Exhibit G that the Non - Participating State or Non -Participating Litigating Subdivision would have received if it had participated in the Settlement Agreement;
b. Except as set forth below in subparagraph III.E.9.c, for any settlement or judgment that meets the requirements of paragraph III.E.9 that exceeds the abatement amount derived from the application of the State Global Allocation Percentage as set forth in Exhibit F-1 or the abatement amount derived from the application of the Subdivision and Special District Allocation Percentage as set forth in Exhibit G, no credits shall be taken against Teva or Allergan's obligation to make payments into the Common Benefit Fund for that portion of the settlement or judgment in excess of the abatement amount derived from the application of the State Global Allocation Percentage as set forth in Exhibit F-1 or the abatement amount derived from the application of the Subdivision and Special District Allocation Percentage as set forth in Exhibit G; C. For any settlement or judgment that meets the requirements of paragraph III.E.9 that exceeds the abatement amount derived from the application of the State Global. Allocation Percentage as set forth in Exhibit F-1 or the abatement amount derived from the application of the Subdivision and Special District Allocation Percentage as set forth in Exhibit G that the Later Litigating State or Later Litigating Subdivision would have received if it had participated in the Settlement Agreement, where the Later Litigating State or Later Litigating Subdivision is represented by any member of the MDL PEC or that member's law firm, Teva or Allergan shall be credited dollar -for -dollar for the full amount of the 7.5% common benefit fee assessment paid into the Common Benefit Fund or the Court Common Benefit Fund;
d. If a credit is made to Allergan or Teva pursuant to subparagraph III.E.9.c., then that amount shall be calculated as a direct reduction to any common benefit fee award made under this Fee Agreement R-10

to the MDL PEC finn(s) that represented the Later Litigating State or Later Litigating Subdivision;
e. Any credits shall be taken first against Teva's or Allergan's payment to the Common Benefit Fund in Teva's or Allergan's respective final Payment Year as set forth in paragraph IILE. I (for Teva Year 6; for Allergan Year 4), up to the full amount of Teva's or Allergan's final year payment obligation, then from the next -to -final Payment Year's payment obligation, and so on;
f. Teva and Allergan shall not be entitled to any credits against the Common Benefit Fund for settlements or judgments paid after Teva's or Allergan's final fee Payment Year.

F. Contingency Fee Fund (40% of the Attorney Fee Fund).

1. Funds from the Attorney Fee Fund shall be allocated to the Contingency Fee Fund on the following yearly schedule, subject to the adjustments set forth below:

Teva Shall Pay
Allergan Shall Pa
Payment
$ 18,486,335.17
$ 16,311,542.21
Year I
Payment
$ 18,486,335.17
$ 16,311,542.21
Year 2
Payment
$ 22,086,335.17
$ 18,711,542.21
Year 3
Payment
$ 22,086,335.17
$ 18,711,542.21
Year 4
Payment
$ 22 086,335.17
$ 0.00
Year 5
Payment
$ 22 086,335.17
$ 0.00
Year 6

2. The Contingency Fee Fund shall be available to compensate Attorneys engaged in Qualifying Representations of Participating Litigating Subdivisions that meet the criteria set forth in subsection IILG. a. The Contingency Fee Fund shall be available to Attorneys who represent Litigating Subdivisions that are Participating Subdivisions, whether their actions are filed in state or federal court, and meet the eligibility criteria of subsection III.G.
b. Participation in the Contingency Fee Fund by counsel that have a case that is not subject to the jurisdiction of the MDL Court shall not create, provide, or waive jurisdiction of the MDL Court over that Litigating Subdivision, that case or Attorneys, other than to oversee R- II

the fairness of the distribution process, and enforcement of this Fee Agreement.

C. Under the terms of the Teva Agreement and Allergan Agreement Litigating Subdivisions must become a Participating Litigating Subdivision under both Agreements to be eligible to participate.

Therefore, Exhibit R applies jointly to Teva and Allergan with the Attorneys' Fee Fund and MDL Cost Fund to include the combined payment from Teva and Allergan.

3. Teva and/or Allergan shall each be entitled to a pro-rata reduction to their own portion of the Contingency Fee Fund payment(s) in accordance with subsection III.F.4., unless, by the Payment Date for the Initial Year Payment, (i) 41 states are Settling States for Teva or 43 states are Settling States for Allergan, (ii) 98% of all Litigating Subdivisions are Participating Subdivisions and/or Subdivisions Subject to a Bar, Case -Specific Resolution, and, (iii) 97% of all Non -Litigating Subdivisions with Populations over 10,000 as listed in Exhibit I are Participating Subdivisions and/or Subdivisions Subject to a Bar, Case -Specific Resolution, in which case no offset shall be applied.

4. If the participation conditions in paragraph IILF.3 are not met, then the amounts owed by Teva and/or Allergan to the Contingency Fee Fund shall be reduced as follows:
a. For Non -Settling States, the Contingency Fee Fund payments shall first be reduced by the amounts identified by the Fee Panel, pursuant to paragraph III.H.7, that would have been owed to counsel for Litigating Subdivisions in Non -Settling States, had those States and those Litigating Subdivisions been Settling States and Participating Subdivisions.
b. Following the calculation in subparagraph III.F.4.a., the Contingency Fee Fund payments shall be reduced to reflect the non - joinder of Litigating Subdivisions in Settling States by subtracting the amounts identified by the Fee Panel, pursuant to paragraph III.H.7, that would have been owed to counsel for Non -Participating Litigating Subdivisions in Settling States had such Litigating Subdivisions been Participating Subdivisions.

5. In the event that after the date of the Settlement Agreement Teva, prior to the Effective Date of the Teva Agreement, or Allergan, prior to the Effective Date of the Allergan Agreement, settles with any Litigating Subdivision that would have been eligible to participate in the defendant's Agreement, and, under such settlement agreement pays attorneys' fees, the Fee Panel shall treat those Litigating Subdivisions as Participating Litigating Subdivisions and, applying the same criteria applicable to all Attorneys for Participating R-12

Litigating Subdivisions, determine what amount they would have been paid from the Contingency Fee Fund if they had become Participating Subdivisions under the Teva Agreement or the Allergan Agreement without such prior settlement. That sum, rather than being paid to the Attorney for the previously settling Litigating Subdivision, shall be credited and/or returned to Teva or Allergan as if determined under (a)(ii) above, except that such credit shall not be greater than the amount paid to the Attorneys under the Litigating Subdivision's prior settlement agreement and credits apply equally over the Fee Payment Years.

6. During the period between the Preliminary Agreement Date and the Effective Date, the MDL PEC, as well as Litigating Subdivisions' Attorneys, shall make best efforts to cease litigation activity against Teva and Allergan, including by jointly seeking stays or severance of claims against Teva and Allergan, where feasible, or postponements if a motion to stay or sever is not feasible or is denied, so long as such actions are not otherwise detrimental to the Litigating Subdivision.

G. Eligibility.

1. It is the intention of all parties participating in the Fee Panel process that there should be total transparency to the Fee Panel and to all fund participants. In connection with the process to be developed by the Fee Panel, any and all monies in attorney's fees received or awarded, including prior or future Contingency Fees, Common Benefit Fees, referral fees, expenses paid, promises for payment, or any other Fee Entitlement, to any Applicant in any opioid litigation shall be disclosed to the Fee Panel as a condition of participating in the Attorney Fee Fund and prior to an award from the Fee Panel. Any payment, expectation of payment or perceived entitlement to participate in a State Back -Stop Agreement or any other agreement reached with a Settling State or any Subdivision or any other source regarding payment of fees must be disclosed to the Fee Panel.

Similarly, any right to payment from any other fund, for example a fund for payment to lawyers representing Settling States or Tribal Nations or Subdivisions shall be disclosed to the Fee Panel. Because it is anticipated that there will be multiple firms listed on contingent fee agreements with Litigating Subdivisions, the Fee Panel shall establish procedures, with input from Attorneys for Participating Litigating Subdivisions, for who should petition for fees from such groups and to whom the fee shall be paid and thereafter distributed to co -counsel in accordance with applicable agreements. For the avoidance of doubt, all Attorneys that are part of such groups must meet the eligibility criteria in paragraph III.G.3, must be subject to the criteria set forth in subsection III.C, and must be disclosed to the Fee Panel.

2. An Applicant may apply for and recover attorneys' fees from the Common Benefit Fund, the Contingency Fee Fund, and any fund created by a past or R-13

future State Back -Stop Agreement, provided the Applicant satisfies the requirements relevant to each such fund and requirements for disclosure to the Fee Panel.

3. An Attorney may not receive any payment from the Attorney Fee Fund (which includes both the Contingency Fee Fund and the Common Benefit Fund) unless the following eligibility criteria are met and annually certified by the Attorney:
a. The Attorney must expressly waive the enforcement against the Litigating Subdivision client of all Fee Entitlements (other than under State Back -Stop Agreements) arising out of or related to any or all Qualifying Representations of any Participating Litigating Subdivision prior to applying for attorneys' fees from the Attorney Fee Fund. All applications for attorneys' fees under this Fee Agreement shall include an affirmation by the Attorney of such waiver and notice to the client(s) of such waiver. Such waiver shall not preclude the Attorney from submitting such Fee Entitlements to the Fee Panel as a factor for consideration in allocating payments from the Attorney Fee Fund or in connection with a State Back -Stop Agreement. For the avoidance of doubt, no Attorney may recover fees under this Fee Agreement unless the Attorney expressly agrees not to enforce Fee Entitlements as to each and every Participating Litigating Subdivision represented by that Attorney, but such Attorneys may participate in and receive funds from a State Back - Stop Agreement.
b. The Attorney must represent that s/he has no present intent to represent or participate in the representation of any Later Litigating Subdivision or Later Litigating State with respect to Released Claims against Released Entities.

C. The Attorney must represent that s/he has not and will not engage in any advertising or solicitation related to Released Claims against Released Entities where such advertising or solicitation relates to a representation of a Subdivision eligible to be a Participating Subdivision after the Reference Date unless the Attorney is recommending participation in the Agreement.
d. The Attorney must represent s/he will not charge or accept any referral fees for any Released Claims brought against Released Entities by Later Litigating Subdivisions or Later Litigating States.

This representation shall not prohibit Attorneys from receiving allocated shares of any future common benefit assessments arising out of settlements or judgments with Later Litigating Subdivisions or Later Litigating States that are the result of the MDL Court's Common Benefit order.

R-14

e. The Attorney may not have and must represent that s/he does not have a Fee Entitlement related to a Later Litigating Subdivision or Later Litigating State, other than a potential Common Benefit Fee. f. The Attorney must fully disclose the participation, or the anticipation of participation, in any agreement with a Settling State or Participating Subdivision concerning fees arising out of or related to the Teva Agreement or Allergan Agreement, including any fees paid or anticipated to be paid or any State Back -Stop Agreement. g. The Attorney must identify for the Fee Panel whether s/he utilized state litigation work product or MDL work product, including but not limited to ARCOS data, document repositories, experts developed in the MDL, trial transcripts, or deposition transcripts.

The Attorney must identify whether s/he signed the MDL
Participation Agreement.
h. Any Attorney who applies for fees from one or both Funds must represent that, having exercised his/her independent judgment, s/he believes the Teva Agreement and the Allergan Agreement to be fair and will make or has made best efforts to recommend both Agreements to his or her Subdivision clients in Settling States. For avoidance of doubt, each Attorney is expected to exercise his or her independent judgment in the best interest of each client individually before determining whether to recommend joining the settlement.

All applications for attorneys' fees or costs under this subsection shall include an affirmation by the Attorney in compliance with the foregoing subparagraphs.

4. No Attorney receiving fees under this Fee Agreement may apply for or recover from the Attorney Fee Fund fees arising from representing a Non - Participating Subdivision except Common Benefit Fees as described in paragraph III.E.2. All applications for attorneys' fees under this subsection shall include an affirmation by the Attorney of compliance with this paragraph.

5. An Attorney who has filed an application under this subsection and received an award of attorneys' fees shall provide a certification of compliance with the requirements of this Fee Agreement annually during the years upon which they are still entitled to receive attorneys' fee payments under this Agreement. This certification will be done as directed by the Panel.

6. If, at any time, the Attorney is unable to make the representations set forth in this subsection, such representations become untrue, or the Attorney falsely represents compliance with the eligibility criteria, the Attorney shall cease to be eligible to receive funds from the Attorney Fee Fund until further R-15

review by the Fee Panel of the Attorney's eligibility under and compliance with this subsection.

7. If an Attorney has a Fee Entitlement with a Later Litigating Subdivision or Later Litigating State or otherwise becomes unable to reaffirm compliance with the eligibility criteria set forth above, the Attorney shall notify the Fee Panel. For the avoidance of doubt, any Attorney who undertakes any new representation of, or has a Fee Entitlement with, a Later Litigating Subdivision or Later Litigating State shall be prohibited from receiving any future funds from the Attorney Fee Fund. If an Attorney fails to notify the Fee Panel of such Fee Entitlement with a Later Litigating Subdivision or Later Litigating State, the Attorney shall be required to refund amounts previously paid. The Fee Panel shall notify Teva and Allergan when it receives notification.

8. To the extent an Attorney who has received compensation from the Attorney Fee Fund based on Qualifying Representations of Participating Litigating Subdivisions under the Teva Agreement or the Allergan Agreement, represents a Later Litigating Subdivision or Later Litigating State, such Attorney shall be obligated to refund such amounts received as compensation from the Attorney Fee Fund to Teva or Allergan. Teva, Allergan, or such Attorney may bring any dispute as to whether such Attorney shall be obligated to refund such amounts received from the Attorney Fee Fund to Allergan or Teva to the Fee Panel. Nothing herein shall require a multi -attorney law firm that has received compensation from the Attorney Fee Fund to refund such amounts if an attorney of the firm that is no longer affiliated with such law firm, after such departure, represents a Later Litigating Subdivision or Later Litigating State, provided that (a) neither the law firm nor any of its other attorneys have any contractual or financial arrangement regarding, stand to benefit directly or indirectly from, or directly or indirectly provide financial or other support of any kind to, the former attorney's representation of the Later Litigating Subdivision or Later Litigating State and (b) if the former attorney was a partner or owner of the multi -attorney law firm at the time that the law firm received compensation from the Attorney Fee Fund, the former attorney shall be obligated to refund such amounts as the former attorney earned as a result of the compensation that the law firm received from the Attorney Fee Fund.

9. In the event that an Attorney is deemed ineligible by the Fee Panel (whether based on its initial application or subsequent recertification), the Fee Panel shall provide notice to the Attorney and give the Attorney 30 days to provide additional information such that the Fee Panel could re -consider the Attorney's eligibility.

1.0. To the extent that an Attorney has a Fee Entitlement with a Participating Subdivision and is authorized to bring Released Claims against Released Entities, but such authorization is, in scope, less broad than the category of R-16

Released Claims set forth in the Teva Agreement or Allergan Agreement, such Attorney may participate fully in both the Contingency Fee Fund and the Common Benefit Fund, without any reduction imposed by the Fee Panel due to the scope of the authorization, so long as the Participating Subdivision fully releases all Released Claims against Released Entities.

11. Attorneys applying to the Attorney Fee Fund knowingly and expressly agree to be bound by the decisions of the Fee Panel, subject to the limited appeal rights set forth in this Fee Agreement, and waive the ability to assert the lack of enforceability of the allocation reached through the procedures outlined herein.

12. Applicants are under an ongoing obligation to inform the Fee Panel in writing of any additional fees earned, expected, or received related to any Opioid litigation throughout the period of the Fee Panel's operation.

H. Calculation ofAmounts Due.

1. The Fee Panel shall be solely responsible for determining the amount of fees to be paid to each Applicant. None of the Released Entities shall have any responsibility, obligation, or liability of any kind whatsoever with respect to how attorneys' fees are calculated under this subsection, except that the Fee Panel may receive information from Teva or Allergan as to (a) the identity of Participating, Non -Participating, Litigating, Later Litigating, and Non -Litigating Subdivisions; (b) the impact of non -participation by a Litigating Subdivision as is relevant to the Fee Panel's determination in paragraph III.E.6; and (c) such other information as Teva or Allergan may voluntarily elect to provide.

2. The Fee Panel shall establish procedures for making determinations under this Fee Agreement consistent with this Fee Agreement and orders of the MDL Court. Such procedures may include submission of documentary and/or other evidence, interviews with Applicants and/or other counsel (including counsel for Teva and Allergan) that the Fee Panel deems appropriate, and/or other means of creating a record upon which fee awards will be based.

3. In making determinations under this Fee Agreement, the Fee Panel must apply the eligibility criteria set forth in subsection III.G of this Fee Agreement and the criteria set forth in paragraph III.E.2. In addition, the Fee Panel will give consideration in regard to Common Benefit Fund awards to the Johnson factors, as well as the following factors (which factors may be applied and given relative weight in the Fee Panel's discretion):
a. The Applicant's contemporaneously recorded time and labor dedicated to Qualifying Representations along with the Applicant's R-17

financial commitment to such Qualifying Representations. Claimed "time" will not be automatically accepted by the Fee Panel but will be critically reviewed and given substantially more weight and consideration if such time was subject to the audit process described in any Pretrial Order(s) governing the collection of common benefit time;
b. The novelty, time, and complexity of the Qualifying
Representations;
C. The skill requisite to perform legal services properly and undesirability of the case;
d. The preclusion of other employment by the Applicant due to time dedicated to Qualifying Representations;
e. The Common Benefit, if any, alleged to have been conferred by the Applicant and whether such Common Benefit work product by that Applicant was used by others in parallel litigations against Released Entities whether within or outside the MDL, provided that any Applicant claiming that s/he substantially benefited cases other than those in which s/he entered an appearance as counsel must substantiate such claims by proffering factual support, such as proper supporting affidavits or other documents as determined by the Fee Panel with input from Attorneys for Participating Litigating Subdivisions;
f. Any "common detriment," as set forth in paragraph III.E.6. g. Any contingent fee agreement or other Fee Entitlement with Participating Subdivisions, enforcement of which, except for State Back -Stop Agreements, are waived in conjunction with the application, the nature and extent of any work for those Participating Subdivisions, whether such Participating Subdivisions actively litigated and, if so, the nature and procedural history of such case(s); h. The experience, reputation, and ability of the Applicant; Whether the Applicant's clients brought Released Claims against Released Entities;
j. The status of discovery in cases primarily handled by the Applicant; k. The nature of any work by the Applicant on "bellwether" cases or cases that were similarly active in litigation;

Any pressure points successfully asserted by the Applicant in cases against Teva or Allergan or any risk for Teva or Allergan created by the Applicant in cases against them;
M. Any risk for defendants created by Applicants in cases against Teva or Allergan;
n. Successful and unsuccessful motion practice in cases worked on by the Applicant;
o. The date of filing of any cases filed by the Applicant; P. Obtaining consolidation of the litigation in the Applicant's j urisdiction;
q. The number and population of entities represented by the Applicant and the fees that would have been awarded under extinguished contingent fee arrangements;
r. Whether the Applicant's clients brought claims against Teva or Allergan;
S. Whether the Applicant has had a leadership role in the litigation, whether in state or federal court;
t. Whether the Applicant has had a leadership role in any negotiations aimed at resolving the litigation;
U. Whether the Applicant's cases have survived motions to dismiss; V. The extent to which the Applicant contributed to the work product used for the common benefit of opioids litigants, including, without limitation, work on ARCOS data, Prescription Data Monitoring Programs, IQVIA data, depositions, document production and analysis experts, motions, briefs and pleadings, trial preparations, and trials;
W. The extent to which litigation was done prior to and contributed to completion of settlement negotiations, as distinct from litigation that was done litigating after the announcement of the Teva Agreement or Allergan Agreement, such latter litigation both being of less value and potentially resulting a common detriment to the settlement process; and
X. Any other factors that the Fee Panel finds to be appropriate to consider after input from Applicants to the Attorney Fee Fund.

4. In the event that States and Subdivisions enter into an additional global settlement with a party or parties other than Teva or Allergan that is (a) under the jurisdiction of the MDL Court in MDL No. 2804, (b) creates a separate common benefit fund to be administered by the Fee Panel, and (c) unless the parties agree to another date, such agreement has an effective date prior to June 30, 2023, the Fee Panel may:
a. Consolidate the Common Benefit approval process to include evaluation of all Common Benefit Applications for all settlements entered after November 14, 2022;
b. Determine the fair and equitable allocation of the Aggregate Common Benefit Fees that come after November 14, 2022;
C. Give consideration to the amount and timing of each settlement, including the amount and timing of Common Benefit Fees; d. The Fee Panel shall abide by the applicable Attorney Fee Agreement in each of the Settlements in Allocating the Common Benefit Fees provided for in the Settlement; and
e. Be guided in their work by the Orders of the Court related to Fees and Costs.

5. The Fee Panel shall develop procedures for receiving a single application, which may be updated or amended based on new information (such as participation by additional Litigating Subdivisions) from each Applicant seeking compensation from each sub fund of the Attorney Fee Fund pursuant to processes and procedures developed by the Fee Panel, which shall not be inconsistent with this Fee Agreement. Any request for attorneys' fees not included on the single application or through the updating/amendment process designed by the Fee Panel shall be deemed waived. For purposes of transparency and to permit the Fee Panel to conduct its work, the application from each Applicant shall, at a minimum, require each Applicant to:
a. Identify all Litigating Subdivisions for which s/he is seeking payment from the Attorney Fee Fund;
b. Identify all Subdivisions in both Settling and Non -Settling States (and, where applicable, Tribal Nations) with respect to which s/he has a Fee Entitlement with respect to Relevant Claims against Released Entities, and identify all co -counsel in such cases; C. Identify which of those Subdivisions are Participating Subdivisions and which are not (with similar information for Tribal Nations, where applicable);
R-20

d. Specify the specific fund or funds within the Attorney Fee Fund from which the Attorney is seeking compensation;
e. Demonstrate his or her eligibility for compensation from the relevant sub funds within the Attorney Fee Fund pursuant to the criteria set forth for the relevant sub fund;
f. Identify any and all Fee Entitlements from representations of States, Tribal Nations, or other plaintiffs related to Released Claims against Released Entities or in opioids-related matters;
g. Notwithstanding "a-f' above, the Panel may consider a supplemental application if the Applicant shows good cause why circumstances exist that will lead to consideration for additional Common Benefit award. Examples would include, but are not limited to, an Applicant having Non -Participating Litigating Subdivision clients that subsequently become Participating Subdivisions, a Bar Date passes that increases participation or the Participation Tier, or an Allocation Agreement is reached.

6. With respect to the Common Benefit Fund, the Fee Panel shall (subject to any applicable MDL Court Order):
a. Review the applications of all Applicants seeking compensation from the Common Benefit Fund, including determining eligibility for each Applicant as set forth in subsection III.G.
b. Reduce, on an annual basis, Teva's or Allergan's payment obligations, as set forth in paragraph III.E.7. The Panel shall inform Teva or Allergan, and the MDL PEC of all such amounts and adjust payment obligations accordingly.

C. Using criteria set forth in subsections III.E and III.H, allocate amounts from the Common Benefit Fund to eligible Applicants, including payment amounts for each Payment Year. In making such allocations, the Panel shall apply the principles set forth in paragraph III.E.6 and shall allocate any reduction in the payments specified in paragraph III.E.7 to the amounts paid to Applicants with a Common Benefit Fee Entitlement.

7. With respect to the Contingency Fee Fund, the Fee Panel shall:
a. Review the applications of all Attorneys seeking compensation from the Litigating Subdivision Fee Fund, including determining eligibility for each Attorney as set forth in subsection IILG. b. Apply the Mathematical. Model in Exhibit A to this Fee Agreement.

R-21

C. Use such allocations to reduce on an annual basis the payment obligations of Teva or Allergan to the Attorney Fee Fund as set forth in paragraph III.F.4, and distributions therefrom, and inform Teva or Allergan and the MDL PEC of all such adjustments.

8. To the extent that there is a dispute about the calculations of the Fee Panel related to the amounts that Teva or Allergan is required to pay (including application of any reductions or offsets under this Fee Agreement), such disputes shall be presented to the Fee Panel and any disputed funds be paid into/held in escrow. The Fee Panel shall resolve such disputes expeditiously, with either Party having the right to seek review from the MDL Court.

9. For purposes of determination of fee or cost awards, allocations, reductions, and possible reversions under this Fee Agreement, unless specified otherwise a Subdivision will be considered a Non -Participating Subdivision if it is not a Participating Subdivision as of the deadline for the application for the fee at issue (or, if the determination does not involve a specific application, the date on which the record for such determination closes).

10. In the event that the Fee Panel, through the use of the Mathematical Model set forth in Exhibit A, allocates funds from the Contingency Fee Fund for an Attorney based on a Qualifying Representation of a Participating Litigating Subdivision and that Subdivision is in a Settling State in which the Consent Judgment has not been approved, such funds shall be placed into escrow until the Consent Judgment is approved, after which time they shall be released.

I. Miscellaneous.

1. The Fee Panel shall charge an hourly rate approved by the Court. The Pre - Effective Date costs associated with the Cost and Expense Fund Administrator shall be paid from funds in the Cost Fund. Post -Effective Date, the cost of the Fee Panel shall be charged against the applicable Fee Fund based on allocation by the Fee Panel and shall not be otherwise funded by Teva and Allergan.

2. The MDL PEC shall provide to Teva and Allergan information they have that identifies Attorneys who represent Litigating Subdivisions who are not Participating Subdivisions and who have an obligation to pay a common benefit assessment, either due to the MDL Court's orders or pursuant to a Participation Agreement.

3. Participating Subdivisions agree to instruct their counsel to treat information, work product and expert materials as confidential under Rule

1.6 of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Accordingly, an Attorney shall not share information or work product with, or experts or R-22

materials to, non -participants (other than the Attorney's own current clients or their lawyers, consultants, experts or other representatives or agents).

However, nothing herein shall prevent MDL Leadership or PEC Counsel from fulfilling their obligations in any MDL and the MDL Court Order.

IV. Miscellaneous
A. Termination. If the Teva Agreement or Allergan Agreement does not proceed past the Reference Date, whether because Teva and Allergan do not determine to proceed or for any other reason, this Fee Agreement shall be null and void, neither Teva nor Allergan shall have any obligation to make any payments under this Fee Agreement other than Fee Panel costs advanced, and Teva, Allergan, and the PEC shall take such steps as are necessary to restore the status quo ante.

B. MDL Court Consideration. This Fee Agreement shall be attached as an exhibit to the Teva Agreement and Allergan Agreement. This Fee Agreement shall also be submitted by Teva, Allergan, and the MDL PEC to the MDL Court for approval pursuant to the motion and order that shall be attached, prior to the Preliminary Agreement Date of the Agreements, as Exhibit B.

In the event that the MDL Court, through an order, makes any change to the amounts potentially to be paid by Teva and Allergan under this Fee Agreement, makes any change to the Fee Panel's consideration of the factors set forth in paragraph III.E.6, or any other material change to the draft Order attached as part of Exhibit B or the terms of this Fee Agreement, Teva, Allergan, and the MDL PEC shall meet and confer concerning such changes.

2. If Teva, Allergan, and the MDL PEC are unable to reach agreement and revisions to this Fee Agreement, this Fee Agreement shall be null and void, Teva and Allergan shall have no obligation to make any payments under this Fee Agreement, and Teva, Allergan, and the MDL PEC shall take such steps as are necessary to restore the status quo ante.

C. Amendment. Once the MDL Court has entered an order implementing this Fee Agreement, this Fee Agreement can only be amended by (1) written agreement of Teva, Allergan, and the MDL PEC and (2) approval by the MDL Court.

D. Jurisdiction and Enforcement. The MDL Court shall have exclusive and ongoing jurisdiction over the enforcement and implementation of this Fee Agreement as set forth herein. The MDL PEC shall be the Authorized Party to enforce this Fee Agreement, as to the payment obligations of Teva and Allergan as set forth in this subsection and as to Attorneys making application to the Funds under this Fee Agreement. Solely for purposes of assessing or allocating common benefit fees, the MDL Court will continue to have jurisdiction over the work product developed in the MDL Court by and under the direction of the MDL PEC with respect to claims against Teva or Allergan, including data and documents, depositions, expert R-23

reports, briefs and pleadings; and the MDL Court's protective orders, management orders, and other decisions regarding such discovery and other work product, including but not limited to, conditions on its use, will continue in full force and effect. Nothing in this subsection authorizes the MDL Court to act contrary to this Agreement or provides the MDL Court with jurisdiction over the Teva Agreement or Allergan Agreement.

R-24

EXHIBIT S
Agreement on the State Outside Counsel Fee Fund for Manufacturer Settlements

1. Definitions.
a. "Manufacturer" means any of Teva and Allergan, and "Manufacturers" means all of the foregoing.
b. "Multistate Manufacturer Settlement Agreement" means This Settlement Agreement along with the separate settlement of opioids-related claims among 30 or more states and the other Manufacturer.
c. "This Settlement Agreement" means the settlement agreement between the Settling States and the Manufacturer to which this Agreement is attached as an Exhibit.
d. "Settling Manufacturer" means the Manufacturer that is a party to This Settlement Agreement.
e. "Settling States" has the meaning given such term in the relevant Multistate Manufacturer Settlement Agreement.

2. Creation of a State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund. The Settling States have agreed to the creation of a state outside counsel fee fund to pay reasonable attorneys' fees of Settling States which have retained outside counsel in connection with litigation against one or more Manufacturers (such fund, the "State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund").

State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund Administration. The State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund shall be administered separately from any other funds for the payment of attorney's fees or costs in connection with This Settlement Agreement, including any common benefit fund, contingency fee fund for subdivision counsel, state cost fund, or MDL expense fund. If necessary, a committee of Attorneys General shall be convened to oversee the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund (the "Manufacturers Fee Fund Committee"). The Manufacturers Fee Fund Committee shall be appointed by the Settling State Members of the Enforcement Committee and shall be comprised solely of Attorneys General of Settling States that engaged outside counsel to pursue litigation against one or more Manufacturers. The Settlement Fund Administrator (the "Fee Fund Administrator") shall administer the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund according to this Exhibit and, if convened, the guidelines and directives of the Manufacturers Fee Fund Committee.

4. State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Eligibility. a. To receive any amount from the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund, both of the following must be true:

1. an outside counsel to a Settling State must have filed and maintained an action in the name of a Settling State or its Attorney General against a Manufacturer in a state or federal court as of November 1, 2022; and

2. the State must become a Settling State for each Multistate Manufacturer Settlement Agreement for which it is eligible.

S-1

b. No Settling State (or its outside counsel) shall receive funds from both the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund and any "Additional Restitution Amount" as may be provided for in This Settlement Agreement. c. In addition to the eligibility criteria set forth in Paragraph 4.a, above, and for the avoidance of doubt, only Settling States under This Settlement Agreement are eligible to receive any funds paid into the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund as a result of This Settlement Agreement.

5. State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund Amount. The Settling Manufacturer shall pay funds into the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund in an amount equal to, and on the schedule identified in, Exhibit M (the "Contribution"). The Settling Manufacturer's Contribution shall be subject to a reduction as described in Paragraph 8, below.

6. State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund Availability and Calculation of Amount.
a. The State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund shall be available to compensate private outside counsel for Settling State Attorneys General for approved fees arising out of representation of the Settling State pursuant to the schedule attached to this agreement as Schedule I (the "Fee Schedule"). b. The Fee Schedule is intended to reflect the fee calculation in subparagraphs

6.c and d, below (the "Fee Calculation"). Subject to adjustments required by Paragraph 8, below, in the event of any discrepancy between the Fee Schedule and the Fee Calculation, the Fee Schedule shall control. Each Settling State, by becoming a Participating State in This Settlement Agreement, agrees that the Fee Schedule reflects the Fee Calculation and waives any right to contest the accuracy of the Fee Schedule, absent manifest error, the exclusion of a Settling State, or the inclusion of a Non -Settling State. The version of the Fee Schedule reflecting any necessary adjustments shall be the "Final Fee Schedule."
c. Except as provided in Paragraph d, below, fees shall be aggregated across the Multistate Manufacturer Settlement Agreements and be calculated by adding two components: (a) a fixed amount consisting of fifty percent (50%) of the amount of remediation funds allocated to a Settling State and its Subdivisions pursuant to the Multistate Manufacturer Settlement Agreements multiplied by 4.5% (or, if lower, the applicable contingency fee percentage in the Settling State's outside counsel contract); and (b) a proportional percentage of the remaining fee due under that Settling State's contract with its outside counsel assuming that fifty percent (50%) of the Settling State's recovery is allocable to a Settling State (rather than allocable to the Settling State's Participating Subdivisions) so that the fees of all eligible Settling States (minus the fixed amount that would have been allocated to any Non -Settling States had they become Settling States) exhausts the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund. The proportional share percentage will be the same for each Settling State S-2

included in the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund. Except as set forth in Paragraph 6.c, fees shall be split proportionally among each Multistate Manufacturer Settlement Agreement, as set forth on the Fee Schedule.
d. Notwithstanding the foregoing, fees for the State of Oklahoma, if it becomes a Settling State under the Multistate Manufacturer Settlement Agreement with Allergan, shall be limited to Oklahoma's share of the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund derived from Allergan's Contribution.

Oklahoma's share of the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund derived from Teva's Contribution shall be reallocated proportionally among the other Settling States eligible to receive payments from the State Outside Counsel Manufacturer Fee Fund.
e. All amounts paid will be less the following:

1. Any costs or fees of the Fee Fund Administrator. The Fee Schedule reflects a holdback amount of $50,000 for such administrative expenses of the Fee Fund Administrator, the remainder of which shall be disbursed proportionally to States receiving monies from the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund at the conclusion of such administration.

7. Payment by the Fee Fund Administrator.
a. The Fee Fund Administrator shall hold the Contribution in escrow until the earlier of (1) both Multistate Manufacturer Settlement Agreements become effective or (2) when instructed by the Settling State Members of the Enforcement Committee.
b. Subject to eligibility pursuant to Paragraph 4, above, a Settling State's outside counsel may receive funds from the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund in the following scenarios ("Payment Scenarios"):

1. The Settling State's outside counsel agrees that the amount listed for such state on the Final Fee Schedule either satisfies in full or exceeds the amounts owed to all such Settling State's outside counsel and such counsel has provided written notice waiving all entitlement to additional fee in respect of any Multistate Manufacturer Settlement Agreement.

2. The Settling State and its outside counsel enter into a signed writing establishing the amount owed to the counsel, which includes an agreement on the payment of the amount listed for such state on the Final Fee Schedule and waives any right of the State or its outside counsel to additional amounts from the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund.

3. A final judgment is entered that is no longer appealable, which judgement adjudicates the amount owed to the Settling State's counsel in respect of This Settlement Agreement and directs the Manufacturers Fee Fund Committee how to pay the amount listed on the Final Fee Schedule for such State.

S-3

If no Payment Scenario is applicable with respect to a Settling State, then the Settling State's share shall be placed in an interest -bearing escrow account (less reasonable expenses of the Fee Fund Administrator) and held unless and until a Payment Scenario is applicable.
c. Upon the applicability of a Payment Scenario 1 with respect to a Settling State, the Fee Fund Administrator shall pay that Settling State's outside counsel the amount identified on the Final Fee Schedule for such state or such lesser amount that satisfies the Settling State's obligation to its outside counsel in full. Any remaining allocation to such State shall be paid to the Settling State.
d. Upon the applicability of a Payment Scenario 2 or 3 with respect to a Settling State, the Fee Fund Administrator shall release monies from the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund in either the amount held by the Fee Fund Administrator, if the amount of the agreement or judgment is equal to or more than the amount held, or the amount indicated in the agreement or in the final judgment, if the amount in the agreement or judgment is less than the amount held.
e. Nothing herein, including the amounts listed in Paragraph 5 above or on any Fee Schedule, shall prevent a Settling State from arguing in any proceeding with its outside counsel that (i) its recovery was less than fifty percent (50%) of the recovery in the settlement agreement down to and including fifteen percent (15%) of the total recovery; (ii) any payment should be discounted by an appropriate discount rate commensurate to the risk of the settlement agreement and the timeline that the Settling State is receiving its payments; (iii) the settlement amount should be lower because the amount a Settling State receives was reduced because such Settling State's outside counsel failed to obtain joinder from a Settling State's Subdivision(s) that the outside counsel also represented; or (iv) any limitation placed by the Settling Manufacturer bars payment of a higher fee to outside counsel. f. In the event the amount due to the Settling State's outside counsel from an escrow account is less than the total amount of funds escrowed on the account of the Settling State, the balance shall be paid to the Settling State. In no event, other than a State becoming a Non -Settling State, shall funds revert to a Manufacturer.

8. Non -Settling States; Reversion and Redistribution. Amounts owed by the Settling Manufacturer to the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund shall be reduced by amounts allocated to the fixed amount for such State under This Settlement Agreement in the event that a listed State becomes a Non -Settling State. The payments for the other Settling States reflected in the Fee Schedule shall be adjusted by the Fee Fund Administrator to reflect a recalculated proportional percentage under the Fee Calculation.

9. Interpretation.

a. This Agreement shall be an Exhibit to each Multistate Manufacturer Settlement Agreement and shall include the Fee Schedule setting forth the presumptive payment calculations for each eligible Settling State. By joining This Settlement Agreement, each State agrees on the presumptive accuracy of the Fee Schedule, absent manifest error, the inclusion of a Non -Settling State, or the exclusion of a Settling State.
b. It is the intent of all parties that the State Outside Counsel Manufacturers Fee Fund function in a similar manner, with similar calculations and mechanics, as the "State Outside Counsel Fee Fund" established in Exhibit S of that certain settlement agreement dated as of July 21, 2021 setting forth the terms of settlement between and among McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., and AmerisourceBergen Corporation, on the one hand, and certain settling states and certain participating subdivisions, on the other hand.

S-5

Schedule I
Fee Schedule
State
Total Fee
Allergan Share
Teva Share
Alaska
$1,252,625.36
$424,966.99
$827,658.36
Delaware
$2,194,254.56
$744,425.11
$1,449,829.45
Georgia
$6,557,324.06
$2,224,644.65
$4,332,679.41
Hawaii
$1,272,349.43
$431,658.60
$840,690.83
Idaho
$1,413,869.58
$479,670.88
$934,198.70
Kentucky
$5,087,998.16
$1,726,159.60
$3,361,838.56
Mississippi
$1,737,202.53
$589,365.16
$1,147,837.38
Nevada
$6,279,564.47
$2,130,411.64
$4,149,152.83
New Mexico
$5,218,189.24
$1,770,328.36
$3,447,860.88
Ohio
$6,831,882.94
$2,317,791.78
$4,514,091.16
Oklahoma
$1,470,349.73
$1,470,349.73
$-
Puerto Rico
$4,823,581.25
$1,636,453.24
$3,187,128.01
South Dakota
$673,251.45
$228,408.00
$444,843.46
Admin Expense
Holdbacks
$18,047.03
$31,952.97
Total
$16,192,680.76
$28,669,762.00

EXHIBIT T
Agreement on the Joint State Cost Fund

1. Definitions.
a. "Opioids Defendant" means Teva, Allergan, or such other defendant in opioids-related litigation that enters into a Multistate Settlement after November 1, 2022, and "Opioids Defendants" means all of the foregoing. b. "Multistate Settlement" means this Settlement Agreement along with any other settlement of opioids-related claims among 30 or more states and an Opioids Defendant.

C. "Settlement Agreement" means the settlement agreement between the Settling States and the Opioids Defendant to which this Agreement is attached as an Exhibit.
d. "Settling Opioids Defendant" means the Opioids Defendant that is a party to the Settlement Agreement.
e. "Settling States" has the meaning given such term in the Settlement Agreement.

2. Creation of a State Cost Fund. The Settling Opioids Defendant and the Settling States agree to the creation of a fund to pay costs and expenses associated with litigation and investigations related to the opioids litigation (such fund, the "State Cost Fund"). The State Cost Fund shall be administered separately from any other funds for the payment of attorneys fees or costs in connection with the Settlement Agreement, including any common benefit fund, contingency fee fund for subdivision counsel, subdivision cost fund, or MDL expense fund.

However, the State Cost Fund shall be administered jointly with similar "State Cost Funds" created in other Multistate Settlements after November 1, 2022; any state cost funds jointly administered in this manner shall be referred to as the "Joint State Cost Fund." To the extent permissible and feasible, the Joint State Cost Fund may also be jointly administered with any fund for reimbursement of states' litigation and investigation costs established by a bankruptcy plan, including the Mallinckrodt bankruptcy plan, any plans that may emerge from the bankruptcies of Purdue and Endo, and any similar bankruptcies of opioids defendants. To the extent feasible, the Joint State Cost Fund may also be jointly administered with the State Cost Funds established pursuant to the Distributors Multistate Settlement and the Janssen Multistate Settlement.

3. State Cost Fund Amount. The Settling Opioids Defendant shall pay into the State Cost Fund in the amount listed on, and on the schedule set forth in, Exhibit M (the "Settling Opioids Defendant's Contribution") for the purpose paying States' costs and expenses associated with to the opioid litigation.

T-1

4. Joint State Cost Fund Committee. A committee of Attorneys General or their designated representatives (such committee, the "Joint State Cost Fund Committee") shall oversee the Joint State Cost Fund. The committee shall be appointed by the Settling State Members of the Enforcement Committee, who shall aim to (i) have equal representation between states that retained contingency fee outside counsel and states that did not retain contingency fee outside counsel with respect to opioids-related litigation, and (ii) maintain consistency of committee membership across state cost funds that compose the Joint State Cost Fund. The Settling State Members of the Enforcement Committee may by majority vote add to or change the composition of the Joint State Cost Fund Committee.

5. Joint State Cost Fund Administrator.
a. The Joint State Cost Fund Committee may select an administrator (the "Joint State Cost Fund Administrator"), who shall administer the Joint State Cost Fund and direct payments to Settling States according to the guidelines and directives of the Joint State Cost Fund Committee. While the expenses of the Joint State Cost Fund Administrator shall be reimbursable pursuant to the principles and guidelines listed below, the Joint State Cost Fund Administrator shall first rely on any separate funds that may be set aside for such purpose in any Multistate Settlement.
b. The Joint State Cost Fund Administrator shall be responsible, under the direction and supervision of the Joint State Cost Fund Committee, for receiving and reviewing applications for reimbursement from the Joint State Cost Fund. This may include the creation of an audit process to ensure the integrity of submissions, as well as reimbursement rules to incentivize accurate submissions.

6. State Cost Fund Guidelines and Principles.
a. Monies in the State Cost Fund shall be released without any delay to reimburse Settling States for documented costs incurred or paid in connection with litigation and investigation related to the opioid litigation. b. In allocating the Joint State Cost Fund, the Joint State Cost Fund Committee shall seek to comply with the following principles:

1. Each State Cost Fund should be used to reimburse costs incurred by States that are Settling States in the Multistate Settlement from which funds are paid. (However, the foregoing sentence does not preclude a Non -Settling State that joins a separate Multistate Settlement from participating in the Joint State Cost Fund with respect to contributions made by other Opioids Defendants.)

2. Funds in any State Cost Fund shall be primarily used to reimburse T-2

costs incurred prior to the date on which the relevant Multistate Settlement was first made available for participation to eligible States. Regardless of other factors considered in prioritizing payments, all costs incurred prior to January 1, 2023, shall be paid before any costs incurred after that date are paid.

3. The Joint State Cost Fund shall prioritize the reimbursement of the following over reimbursement of any State's litigation or investigation costs:
• the reasonable costs of the Joint State Cost Fund
Administrator;
• repayment of National Association of Attorneys General grants made in connection with opioid investigations and litigation, without regard to when the grants were made; • repayment of state -attributable costs of any mediator in connection with negotiations of a Multistate Settlement;

4. The Joint State Cost Fund shall seek to prioritize costs in the following order:
• litigation -related costs; then
• investigation -related costs; then
• settlement and negotiation related costs; then
• cost shares.

5. Costs incurred by a State's outside counsel that the State is contractually obligated to reimburse shall be treated as costs incurred by a State.

6. As between similar categories of costs (e.g., defendant -specific litigation -related costs), the Joint State Cost Fund shall first reimburse costs incurred by a State's outside counsel that the State is contractually obligated to reimburse out of its recovery, and then reimburse costs directly incurred by States.

7. The Joint State Cost Fund shall be available to reimburse only those costs which have not yet been reimbursed to a State from any other source, including any other fund set aside in a Multistate Settlement or bankruptcy plan for the reimbursement of costs or any individual T-3

state settlements.

8. The Joint State Cost Fund should not reimburse expenses that are expected to be reimbursed from another source, such as a bankruptcy debtor, unless such expected reimbursements do not come to fruition within a reasonable amount of time. This includes cost shares paid by states.

9. When coordinating among different state cost funds that each could be used to reimburse a given expense, the Joint State Cost Fund Committee may set guidelines to equitably distribute
reimbursements across all state cost funds in a manner that prioritizes costs unlikely to be otherwise reimbursed to a similarly situated State.

10. The Joint State Cost Fund may deny reimbursement of costs, on either an individual basis or a categorical basis, that a supermajority (75%+) of the Joint State Cost Fund Committee determines to be unreasonable.

11. After all costs identified in the foregoing have been reimbursed, the remaining funds in the Joint State Cost Fund shall be distributed to states in proportion to their allocation of remediation payments in the Mallinckrodt bankruptcy plan. Such distribution shall be treated as a reimbursement for States' unenumerated costs of administering the Multistate Settlements and no subdivision shares shall be carved out of such disbursement, nor shall any attorney's fees be assessed against such distribution (unless individually agreed to by a State). c. In applying the foregoing principles, the Joint State Cost Fund Committee shall have the discretion to vary their application in order to ensure equity among similarly situated states and to facilitate the ease and speed of administering the Joint State Cost Fund. The Joint State Cost Fund Committee may also apply percentages to approximate costs attributable to a particular Opioids Defendant (or categories of Opioids Defendants) in a manner that seeks to treat similarly situated states equitably. d. The Joint State Cost Fund Committee shall establish guidelines for the submission and approval of expenses eligible for reimbursement from the Joint State Cost Fund, which guidelines may be coordinated and consolidated with any similar cost funds in other state opioid settlements for purposes of joint administration and efficiency.
e. Unless waived by the Joint State Cost Fund Committee, the Joint State Cost T-4

Fund Administrator shall, in accordance with such guidelines, receive from Settling States records sufficient to demonstrate the incurrence and payment of each expense.
f. Where the Joint State Cost Fund Committee determines by a supermajority vote (75%+) that outside counsel for a Settling State has failed to exercise reasonable diligence in reviewing submitted costs for allowability, and such failure has resulted in the reimbursement of unallowed costs to such outside counsel, the Committee shall have the discretion to reduce or recover payments made to such outside counsel in an amount calculated to incentivize the exercise of reasonable diligence.

7. State Undertakings. Each State submitting for reimbursement of costs from the Joint State Cost Fund agrees:
a. to only submit costs allowable under this Joint State Cost Fund Agreement; b. to provide all back-up documentation that may be requested with respect to any submitted cost and to make itself available for any questions related to such costs;
c. to exercise reasonable diligence to ensure that all submitted costs are allowable under (1) this Joint State Cost Fund Agreement, (ii) the State's contract with its outside counsel, if relevant, (iii) state law, and (iv) the policies and procedures applicable to the State's retention of outside counsel, if relevant; and
d. to promptly return any excess payments made to the State or its outside counsel from the Joint State Cost Fund, including payments made for costs that were reimbursed from another source or are not allowable hereunder.

T-5

Downey City CouncilApril 11, 2023

Downey City Council
April 11, 2023