The GLP-1 Litigation Docket: Case Tracker, September 2026
Manufacturer suits against compounders, compounder antitrust countersuits, and telehealth false-advertising claims. A consolidated status file on the litigation reshaping this market faster than the rulemaking is.
Findings
- Eli Lilly sued compounders Strive Pharmacy and Empower in April 2025, then four telehealth companies weeks later.
- In April 2026 a federal judge dismissed part of Lilly's suit against Empower while allowing other claims to proceed.
- Strive Specialties filed an antitrust countersuit against Lilly and Novo Nordisk on January 14, 2026; it was dismissed on August 6, 2026 by Judge Micaela Alvarez in the Western District of Texas.
- Novo Nordisk sued Hims & Hers in February 2026 and has said it has filed 132 suits across 40 states, winning 44 permanent injunctions.
The regulatory story gets the headlines, but private litigation has moved faster and has already produced binding outcomes. This file consolidates what the public record shows as of September 2026. Where reporting conflicts on procedural detail, we flag it rather than picking one version.
Track one: manufacturers against compounders
Eli Lilly v. Empower
Filed in April 2025. Lilly alleged Empower unlawfully compounded and marketed large quantities of tirzepatide-containing products after the shortage resolved, including injectable and orally disintegrating tablet formulations, some supplemented with vitamin B3.
In April 2026 a federal judge dismissed part of the suit while allowing other claims to proceed. Empower characterised the ruling as striking down central allegations. Reporting on the ruling describes it as a mixed outcome in which claims regarding marketing and unauthorized compounding survived the motion to dismiss.
Contemporaneous reporting has placed the Empower action in different venues — one account cites a District of New Jersey filing, another a Southern District of Texas docket number. We have not resolved which is accurate and are not asserting either. Anyone relying on venue for a substantive purpose should pull the docket directly.
Eli Lilly v. Strive Pharmacy
Filed April 2025 in federal court in Delaware. Lilly alleged Strive's compounded tirzepatide products — including formulations with additives such as vitamin B12 or glycine — were falsely marketed as safer or more effective than the FDA-approved products.
Note the additive detail: the same reformulation strategy that served as a regulatory argument also became the factual basis for a false-advertising claim.
Cease and desist campaign
Alongside the suits, Lilly indicated it would issue cease and desist letters to approximately fifty other compounders and telehealth companies demanding they halt mass compounding and confirm compliance. Lilly had previously filed suits against more than two dozen medical spas, wellness centers, and compounding pharmacies over products purported to contain tirzepatide.
Track two: the antitrust countersuit, and its dismissal
On January 14, 2026, Strive Compounding Pharmacy filed a federal antitrust action against Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk in the US District Court for the Western District of Texas, San Antonio Division, captioned Strive Specialties, Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., Novo Nordisk A/S, and Novo Nordisk, Inc., Case No. 5:26-CV-1055.
The complaint alleged the two manufacturers entered exclusive agreements with telehealth companies prohibiting those platforms from working with compounding pharmacies, and that these arrangements prevented clinicians from prescribing and patients from accessing compounded GLP-1 medications, particularly personalized versions. It further alleged Lilly disparaged compounded GLP-1 drugs by characterising them as unsafe and grouping them with counterfeit or fake medications.
On August 6, 2026, US District Judge Micaela Alvarez dismissed the antitrust suit.
The antitrust theory was the compounding sector's most ambitious offensive position — an attempt to reframe manufacturer enforcement as exclusionary conduct rather than IP protection. Its dismissal removes the sector's strongest available counterweight at the same moment the FDA is moving to close the bulks-list pathway.
Track three: manufacturers against telehealth
Weeks after suing the compounders, Lilly sued four telehealth companies — Mochi Health, Fella Health, Willow Health, and Henry Meds — alleging false advertising and unfair competition. A federal judge subsequently dismissed Lilly's false-advertising claim against Willow Health with prejudice on standing and causation grounds.
Separately, Novo Nordisk sued Hims & Hers for patent infringement in February 2026. Novo has said it has now filed 132 suits across 40 states and won 44 permanent injunctions.
Docket summary
- Whether the Strive antitrust dismissal is being appealed, and on what grounds.
- Trial dates in the surviving Lilly v. Empower claims.
- The disposition of the remaining three telehealth actions.
- How many of Novo's reported 132 suits are contested versus resolved by default or consent.
- Whether the FDA's proposed bulks-list rule affects the merits posture of any pending case.
Reading the pattern
Three things stand out from the consolidated record. First, the manufacturers are winning on aggregate volume rather than on a single decisive ruling — 44 permanent injunctions is a structural result, not a headline one. Second, the defence has lost its most ambitious offensive theory with the August antitrust dismissal. Third, the courts have not been uniformly favourable to manufacturers: partial dismissals in the Empower matter and the with-prejudice dismissal of the Willow claim show the false-advertising theories are not automatic wins.
The net effect is a market being narrowed case by case, on a faster clock than the rulemaking, with no single ruling that settles the question.
Primary sources & citations
- PR Newswire, “Strive Compounding Pharmacy Files Landmark Antitrust Lawsuit Against Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk,” January 14, 2026.
- HMP Global Learning Network / Pharmacy Learning Network, reporting on the Strive antitrust complaint, Case No. 5:26-CV-1055, W.D. Tex.
- Reporting on the August 6, 2026 dismissal of the Strive antitrust action by US District Judge Micaela Alvarez, W.D. Tex., San Antonio Division.
- Endpoints News, “Court dismisses part of Lilly lawsuit against compounder Empower, but some claims can proceed,” April 2026.
- FirstWord Pharma, reporting on the partial dismissal in Eli Lilly v. Empower Pharmacy.
- Reporting on Eli Lilly actions against Strive Pharmacy and Empower Clinic Services, and the associated cease and desist campaign.
- Drug Discovery Trends, reporting on Novo Nordisk litigation totals and the Hims & Hers action.
Editorial note
Looking for a provider rather than a citation?
This site does not review or rank telehealth providers inside its research articles, and carries no provider links in article text. Our provider comparison grid, including how each one is monetized, lives on the homepage.
Open the provider grid