The U.S. Supreme Court on March 23, 2026 denied Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited’s petition for review, leaving in place a lower‑court ruling that certified a class‑action lawsuit against Takeda and Eli Lilly. The case, brought by third‑party payers, accuses the companies of marketing the diabetes drug Actos without disclosing its link to bladder cancer, a claim that could trigger treble damages under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
The lawsuit is a multibillion‑dollar RICO action that could expose Takeda to more than $7 billion in liability. Plaintiffs argue that the companies engaged in a coordinated marketing campaign that concealed the drug’s cancer risk, thereby inflating prescriptions and costs for insurers. The court’s decision to allow the class action to proceed means that the litigation will continue, potentially leading to large financial penalties if the plaintiffs prevail.
Actos, once a blockbuster for Takeda, was genericized in 2012 and is no longer reported separately in the company’s financial statements. Takeda’s overall revenue has hovered around $30 billion in recent years—$29.803 billion in FY2023, $29.42 billion in FY2024, and a projected $30.238 billion for FY2025—making the drug’s current contribution to earnings minimal. The $1.5 billion figure cited in earlier reports refers to past sales and is no longer relevant to the company’s present financial position.
Takeda’s Actos litigation history is extensive. In 2015 the company settled more than 9,000 claims for $2.37 billion, and earlier jury verdicts had awarded billions in damages, including a $9 billion verdict that was later reduced. These past settlements underscore the magnitude of the legal risk that the current lawsuit represents and explain why the Supreme Court’s ruling is closely watched by investors and legal analysts alike.
While the decision does not immediately threaten Takeda’s revenue stream—Actos no longer represents a significant portion of the company’s earnings—it does open the door to potentially large legal costs and damages. The ruling signals that the company’s legal exposure remains substantial and that future court rulings could materially affect its financial outlook.
In summary, the Supreme Court’s denial of Takeda’s petition allows a high‑stakes racketeering lawsuit to proceed, reaffirming the company’s ongoing legal vulnerability. Investors will likely monitor subsequent court developments closely, as any adverse outcome could have a pronounced impact on Takeda’s financial health and shareholder value.
The content on EveryTicker is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as financial or investment advice. We are not financial advisors. Consult with a qualified professional before making any investment decisions. Any actions you take based on information from this site are solely at your own risk.