THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS. MEDCO HEALTH SOLUTIONS, INC.

This civil enforcement action is brought under Business and Professions Code Sections

17200 et seq. (the Unfair Competition Law) and Sections 16700 et seq. (the Cartwright Act)

against defendant Medco Health Solutions, Inc. (“Medco”). Medco and its subsidiaries constitute

a pharmacy benefit manager (“PBM”), an entity that contracts with health plans, employers, labor

unions, and other similar entities to administer the prescription drug component of health

insurance plans. In 2005, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (“CalPERS”)

issued a request for proposal for the provision of pharmacy benefits services to its members (the

“2005 RFP”). Numerous PBMs, including Medco, responded to the 2005 RFP. Pursuant to the

RFP process, Medco was awarded the CalPERS PBM contract.

PARTIES

Kamala D. Harris is the duly elected Attorney General of the State of California and

is the chief law enforcement officer of the State. The Attorney General is authorized by

Government Code Sections 12658 and 12660 and by Business and Professions Code Sections

16754, 16755, and 17204 to bring actions in the name of the People of the State of California to

enforce the Unfair Competition Law and Cartwright Act, and brings this action in her law

enforcement capacity.

Defendant Medco is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in

Franklin Lakes, New Jersey, and at all times relevant to this Complaint, was engaged in the

business of providing PBM services. Defendant conducted business in the State of California by

bidding on the 2005 RFP and providing services to CalPERS under the PBM contract awarded

pursuant to that RFP. Whenever reference is made in this Complaint to any act of Defendant

Medco, that allegation shall be deemed to mean that Defendant did or authorized the acts alleged

in this Complaint through its principals, officers, directors, employees, members, agents,

consultants and/or representatives while they were acting within the actual or ostensible scope of

their authority. Medco’s conduct described in this Complaint occurred in the County of San

Francisco and throughout the State of California.

Complaint for Equitable ReliefJURISDICTION AND VENUE

The Court has proper jurisdiction over this action under Section 410.10 of the

California Code of Civil Procedure and Business and Professions Code Sections 16754, 17200 et

seq.

i

Jurisdiction over Medco is proper because it has purposely availed itself of the

privilege of conducting business activities in California and because it currently maintains

systematic and continuous business contacts with this State, has numerous customers who do

business with Medco from locations across this State, and provides PBM services to residents of

the State of California.

5, Venue is proper in this Court because Medco engaged in transactions in this County,

and because Medco has received profits from engaging in transactions in California.