Pfizer Agrees to Pay $59.7M to Settle Biohaven’s Nurtec ODT Kickback Claims

Pfizer has agreed to pay $59,746,277 to resolve allegations that its wholly-owned subsidiary Biohaven Pharmaceutical Holding Company Ltd. paid kickbacks to healthcare providers to induce prescriptions of its migraine drug Nurtec ODT. The settlement, announced by the U.S. Department of Justice on January 24, 2025, resolves False Claims Act claims tied to conduct that ran from March 1, 2020 through September 30, 2022, in the period before Pfizer acquired Biohaven. The case was built around the $59.7 million Biohaven kickback settlement release, in which prosecutors alleged the company paid “speaker honoraria and meals at high end restaurants” to selected prescribers.

The settlement is the second-order consequence of Pfizer’s October 2022 $11.6 billion acquisition of Biohaven, a deal that closed a one-month gap before the misconduct period ended. The kickback scheme the government described was already public through a whistleblower lawsuit filed in August 2021. The DOJ’s release makes clear the deal contains “no determination of liability,” an ordinary framing for a civil False Claims Act resolution that closes the case without an admission.

The Settlement and the Money Trail

The $59,746,277 figure the DOJ announced is a single line item that splits three ways. Approximately $50.2 million constitutes the federal portion of the recovery, and approximately $9.5 million constitutes a recovery for State Medicaid programs, according to the DOJ release. The remainder, structured as a relator’s share, flows to the former sales representative whose qui tam lawsuit brought the conduct to the government’s attention.

Of the federal portion, Patricia Frattasio, a former Biohaven sales representative, will receive approximately $8.4 million. State recoveries are layered on top, with California set to receive $413,776 for its share of losses to Medi-Cal, as detailed in California’s $59.7 million Biohaven settlement share announcement from Attorney General Rob Bonta. The federal-state split tracks how False Claims Act settlements of this kind are typically structured: federal damages first, state Medicaid losses on top.

The qui tam case is captioned U.S. ex rel. Patricia Frattasio v. Biohaven Pharmaceutical Holding Company Ltd., No. 6:21-CV-06539 (W.D.N.Y.). It was filed in the Western District of New York in August 2021, more than a year before Pfizer’s deal was announced. The DOJ’s release states that the claims resolved are “allegations only and there has been no determination of liability.”

How the Speaker Programs Allegedly Worked

Biohaven, in the period before the Pfizer acquisition, ran a speaker bureau for its migraine drug. The DOJ alleged that the company “selected certain health care providers to be part of the Nurtec speaker bureau and provided them paid speaking opportunities with the intent that the speaker honoraria and meals would induce them to prescribe Nurtec ODT.” The speaker honoraria the government described were not casual payments; they were the currency of a sales channel dressed up as medical education.

The government’s allegations identified two specific patterns. First, “certain prescribers who attended multiple programs on the same topic received no educational benefit from attending repeat programs.” Second, certain Biohaven programs were attended by “individuals with no educational need to attend, such as the speakers’ spouses, family members, or friends, or colleagues from the speakers’ own medical practice.” Together, those patterns, the government alleged, violated the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the law that prohibits offering or paying anything of value to induce the referral of items or services covered by Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE, and other federal healthcare programs.

Pfizer Calls It a Legacy Biohaven Matter

Pfizer’s position is that the conduct predates its ownership. In an emailed statement, a Pfizer spokesperson said: “The settlement relates to alleged conduct at Biohaven before Pfizer’s acquisition of the company in October 2022 and does not include any admission of liability or wrongdoing.” The spokesperson added that the company is “pleased to put this legacy Biohaven matter behind us, so that we can continue to focus on the needs of patients.”

The deal closed on October 3, 2022. The misconduct period ended on September 30, 2022, a one-month gap that placed the conduct squarely inside the pre-acquisition era.

The settlement relates to alleged conduct at Biohaven before Pfizer’s acquisition of the company in October 2022 and does not include any admission of liability or wrongdoing. We are pleased to put this legacy Biohaven matter behind us, so that we can continue to focus on the needs of patients.

Pfizer’s statement, attributed to a company spokesperson.

The drug at the center of the case has only grown commercially. Nurtec ODT earned $928 million in 2023 sales, per FiercePharma’s reporting on the settlement. The drug is on track to cross the $1 billion mark for the first time in 2024, the trade publication reported. The FDA originally approved rimegepant, sold as Nurtec ODT, for the acute treatment of migraine in adults in February 2020, and expanded the label to include the preventive treatment of episodic migraine in May 2021.

The acquisition that brought Biohaven inside Pfizer was a $148.50 per share cash offer, totaling approximately $11.6 billion. That transaction is documented in Pfizer’s $11.6 billion completion of the Biohaven acquisition, a press release dated October 3, 2022. The deal added rimegepant (Nurtec ODT) and zavegepant (a CGRP nasal spray) to Pfizer’s internal medicine pipeline.

A Whistleblower’s Three-Year Wait

Patricia Frattasio, a former sales representative at Biohaven, filed the qui tam lawsuit in the Western District of New York on August 18, 2021, more than nine months before Pfizer’s acquisition was even announced. Her complaint alleged that Biohaven had induced the submission of fraudulent bills to the government through “improper speaker program honoraria; ad hoc kickbacks; electronic health record software cost assistance; and copay cards.”

The relator’s share of $8.4 million reflects the standard qui tam framework, under which private parties who file successful actions on behalf of the United States can receive between 15 and 30 percent of the federal proceeds. Frattasio’s recovery is on the higher end of that range, signaling the DOJ judged her information to be both original and substantial.

The case closed a 27-month gap between the public surfacing of the allegations and the federal resolution. The DOJ’s announcement on January 24, 2025 came more than three years after the lawsuit was filed and more than two years after the Biohaven acquisition closed.

1. February 2020 – FDA approves Nurtec ODT for acute migraine treatment in adults.
2. May 2021 – FDA expands approval to preventive treatment of episodic migraine.
3. August 18, 2021 – Patricia Frattasio files the qui tam lawsuit in the Western District of New York.
4. May 2022 – Pfizer announces the $11.6 billion Biohaven acquisition agreement.
5. October 3, 2022 – Pfizer closes the acquisition; Biohaven speaker programs are terminated.
6. January 24, 2025 – DOJ announces the $59,746,277 settlement.

Why Federal Prosecutors Built the Case

The Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits offering or paying anything of value to induce referrals of items or services covered by Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE, and other federal healthcare programs. Its purpose is to keep medical providers’ judgments free of financial incentives. False claims submitted to those programs, paid as a result of those inducements, become a parallel False Claims Act violation.

Brett A. Shumate, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Civil Division, framed the settlement as part of a broader enforcement posture. “Through this settlement and others, the government has demonstrated its commitment to ensuring that drug companies do not use kickbacks to influence physician prescribing,” Shumate said. “The department will use every tool at its disposal to prevent pharmaceutical manufacturers from undermining the objectivity of treatment decisions by health care providers.” Shumate is the most senior Justice Department Civil Division official quoted on the case.

U.S. Attorney Trini E. Ross for the Western District of New York focused on the patient side of the conduct. “Patients deserve to know that their doctor is prescribing medications based on their doctor’s medical judgment, and not as a result of financial incentives from pharmaceutical companies,” Ross said. “This settlement reflects our commitment to hold those who violate the laws accountable, regardless of their status or prestige.” The “status or prestige” language signaled that the size of the parent company was not a shield.

HHS-OIG Deputy Inspector General Christian J. Schrank and DCIS Special Agent in Charge Patrick J. Hegarty added their agencies’ weight. Schrank said violations of the anti-kickback statute “can unduly influence prescribers and negatively impact taxpayer-funded health care.” Hegarty said investigating schemes that undermine the integrity of TRICARE, the health care system for military members and their families, “is a top priority” for DCIS. Both statements reflect the cross-agency coordination that the False Claims Act’s qui tam machinery enables.

The case was handled by Trial Attorney Jessica Sarkis of the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch Fraud Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney David M. Coriell of the Western District of New York. The DOJ release notes that the claims resolved are allegations only and that there has been no determination of liability. The agency also reminded potential whistleblowers that tips about healthcare fraud can be reported to HHS at 800-HHS-TIPS.

States Step In While the Drug Keeps Selling

State attorneys general followed the federal announcement within days. California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced on February 3, 2025 that California would receive $413,776 of its Medi-Cal losses. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel announced her state’s participation the same day. The DOJ’s release noted that approximately $9.5 million of the $59.7 million constitutes a recovery for State Medicaid programs, with the precise per-state allocation set out in a separate settlement document.

The civil settlement resolves claims under both federal and state False Claims Act provisions. The state recoveries run on a parallel track: federal damages first, state Medicaid losses layered on top, with attorneys general coordinating through a multistate agreement. While the case is closing, the drug itself continues to grow commercially. Nurtec ODT earned $928 million in 2023 sales and is on track to cross $1 billion in 2024, per FiercePharma.

Pfizer’s Settlement in a Wider Pharma Pattern

Pfizer’s settlement lands in a string of recent pharmaceutical kickback cases the DOJ has resolved. The mechanisms differ from case to case, but the statutes invoked are the same.

• Teva Pharmaceuticals USA and Teva Neuroscience – $450 million combined, resolved in fall 2024 over Copaxone copay assistance foundations (2006-2017).
• Biogen – $900 million, finalized in 2022 over a five-year kickback scheme to boost multiple sclerosis drug sales.
• Novartis – more than $642 million, resolved in 2020 over doctor kickbacks and illegal Medicare copayment support.
• Pfizer (Biohaven) – $59.7 million, Nurtec ODT speaker programs (2020-2022).

Each of those cases targeted different mechanisms, including speaker bureaus, copay foundations, and direct payments, but all invoked the Anti-Kickback Statute and the False Claims Act. The Nurtec case is a speaker-bureau case, structurally closer to a Novartis pattern than to the Teva copay-foundation model. The financial scale of Pfizer’s $59.7 million settlement sits at the lower end of the recent range.

For Pfizer, the settlement is a written-off legacy cost absorbed inside a $11.6 billion acquisition. Nurtec ODT, the asset that prompted the deal, generated $928 million in 2023 sales and is on track to cross $1 billion in 2024. The price tag for the misconduct, in other words, is rounding error next to the price tag for the acquisition that inherited it.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did Biohaven allegedly do?

From March 2020 through September 2022, Biohaven paid speaker honoraria and high-end restaurant meals to selected healthcare providers, with the intent of inducing them to prescribe the migraine drug Nurtec ODT, according to the DOJ’s January 24, 2025 settlement release. The government alleged the payments violated the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and led to the submission of false claims to federal healthcare programs.

Why is Pfizer paying if the conduct happened before the acquisition?

Pfizer became Biohaven’s parent when it closed the $11.6 billion acquisition on October 3, 2022. The settlement is paid on behalf of Biohaven as the company’s current owner. Pfizer states that the settlement “does not include any admission of liability or wrongdoing” and that the matter relates to “alleged conduct at Biohaven before Pfizer’s acquisition.”

How much of the settlement goes to the whistleblower?

Patricia Frattasio, a former Biohaven sales representative, will receive approximately $8.4 million as her share of the federal recovery. The qui tam framework allows relators in successful cases to receive between 15 and 30 percent of the federal proceeds. Frattasio filed the underlying lawsuit on August 18, 2021.

Which federal healthcare programs were affected?

The settlement resolves allegations of false claims submitted to Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE, and other federal healthcare programs. Approximately $50.2 million of the $59.7 million constitutes the federal portion of the recovery, and approximately $9.5 million constitutes a recovery for State Medicaid programs.

Has Pfizer or Biohaven admitted wrongdoing?

No. The DOJ release states the claims resolved are “allegations only and there has been no determination of liability.” Pfizer’s spokesperson characterized the matter as “alleged conduct at Biohaven before Pfizer’s acquisition of the company in October 2022.”