The U.S. Supreme Court refused Monday to review a bid from LegitScript to duck an antitrust case accusing it of blacklisting a drug price checking website despite contentions that it facilitates illegal imports of prescription drugs.

The justices denied a petition from the pharmacy verification and monitoring service provider in an order list without explanation, as is customary. LegitScript was asking the high court to review whether PharmacyChecker.com has standing to bring its antitrust claims even though a main part of its business is allegedly helping to facilitate unlawful activity.

The petition came after the Ninth Circuit affirmed an Oregon federal court's ruling in May that denied a summary judgment bid from LegitScript, finding that "unclean hands" is not a permissible defense to liability in an antitrust suit.

An attorney for PharmacyChecker.com, Aaron R. Gott of Bona Law PC, told Law360 on Monday the justices' denial of the petition was not surprising.

"LegitScript sought certiorari on a legal question of antitrust standing on which there is no circuit split, and its factual premise — that PharmacyChecker's business mainly is to help facilitate illegal importation — was rejected as unsupported by evidence in the courts below," Gott said. "We weren't bracing for a decision on this, and we doubt LegitScript was, either."

A representative for LegitScript told Law360 on Monday the company does not comment on pending litigation.

PharmacyChecker accuses LegitScript and several industry groups of conspiring with search engines, social media companies and payment intermediaries to suppress its traffic in an effort to block competition from international pharmacies that offer lower drug prices. LegitScript and the pharmacy associations have argued that the supposed blacklisting is aimed at preventing illegal imports and not at suppressing competition.

LegitScript convinced a court in New York to dismiss the claims against it in 2021 based on a lack of personal jurisdiction, prompting PharmacyChecker to get that part of the case transferred to Oregon, where it survived another dismissal attempt.

PharmacyChecker is continuing to press false advertising claims against the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy and other industry groups in New York after having its antitrust claims tossed on summary judgment. The court there based its ruling on the argument that PharmacyChecker was suing to protect a business "completely or almost completely geared towards facilitating illegality."

LegitScript moved for summary judgment on the claims in Oregon following the ruling in New York. However, U.S. District Judge Michael H. Simon found in January last year that PharmacyChecker does have standing because it has broken no law and is "merely facilitating illegal activity by third parties, among other lawful activities."

The Ninth Circuit rejected LegitScript's appeal in May, concluding that the defense of unclean hands doesn't bar the lawsuit. In its decision, the Ninth Circuit also said LegitScript didn't provide evidence suggesting PharmacyChecker itself illegally imported any foreign drugs, or that its business almost exclusively involved facilitating the illegal importation of foreign drugs.

In its high court petition, LegitScript argued that the Ninth Circuit "elevates antitrust policy above all others — including policies directed at ensuring public safety, such as the policies behind the prohibition on importation of foreign drugs — with little to no justification."

LegitScript is represented by Christopher J. Pallanch and Sasha A. Petrova of Tonkon Torp LLP.

PharmacyChecker.com is represented by Philip S. Van Der Weele of K&L Gates LLP and Aaron R. Gott and James F. Lerner of Bona Law PC.

The case is LegitScript LLC v. PharmacyChecker.com LLC, case number 25-223, in the Supreme Court of the United States.