Civil settlement amount

  
medicines sold by us) and communications with competitors regarding the same. On November 30, 2018, the DOJ notified us that it had closed the investigation. The New York Attorney General has also requested that we provide information regarding business practices in the IV saline industry. We cooperated with that request and have been advised that the matter has now been closed.In August 2019, we were named in an amended complaint filed by Fayette County, Georgia in the MDL In re: National Prescription Opiate Litigation pending in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio. The complaint alleges that multiple manufacturers and distributors of opiate products improperly marketed and diverted these products, which caused harm to Fayette County. The complaint is limited in its allegations as to Baxter and does not distinguish between injectable opiate products and orally administered opiates. We manufactured generic injectable opiate products in our facility in Cherry Hill, NJ, which we divested in 2011.In November 2019, we and certain of our officers were named in a class action complaint captioned Ethan E. Silverman et al. v. Baxter International Inc. et al. that was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The plaintiff, who allegedly purchased shares of our common stock during the specified class period, filed this putative class action on behalf of himself and shareholders who acquired Baxter common stock between February 21, 2019 and October 23, 2019. The plaintiff alleges that we and certain officers violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by making allegedly false and misleading statements and failing to disclose material facts relating to certain intra-company transactions undertaken for the purpose of generating foreign exchange gains or avoiding foreign exchange losses, as well as our internal controls over financial reporting. On January 29, 2020, the Court appointed Varma Mutual Pension Insurance Company and Louisiana Municipal Police Employees Retirement System as lead plaintiffs in the case. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on June 25, 2020 containing substantially the same allegations. On August 24, 2020, we filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On January 12, 2021, the Court granted our motion to dismiss the amended complaint but gave plaintiffs an opportunity to file a further-amended complaint. The parties reached an agreement to settle the case for $16 million, subject to the completion of confirmatory discovery and final approval by the Court. The Court granted final approval of the settlement on August 11, 2021 and the settlement became effective on September 13, 2021. In addition, we have received a stockholder request for inspection of our books and records in connection with the announcement made in our Form 8-K on October 24, 2019 that we had commenced an internal investigation into certain intra-company transactions that impacted our previously reported non-operating foreign exchange gains and losses. As initially disclosed on October 24, 2019, we also voluntarily advised the staff of the SEC of our internal investigation and we have been cooperating with the staff of the SEC. On February 18, 2022, we reached a settlement with the SEC, which resolved the SEC’s investigation into related matters. Without admitting or denying the findings in the administrative order issued by the SEC, we agreed to pay a civil penalty of $18 million and to cease and desist from violations of specified provisions of the federal securities laws and related rules. In the order, the SEC acknowledged the Company’s cooperation. We are fully accrued for the civil penalty as of December 31, 2021 and we expect to pay the penalty in the first quarter of 2022.In March 2020, two lawsuits were filed against us in the Northern District of Illinois by plaintiffs alleging injuries as a result of exposure to ethylene oxide used in our manufacturing facility in Mountain Home, Arkansas to sterilize certain of our products. The plaintiffs sought damages, including compensatory and punitive damages in an unspecified amount, and unspecified injunctive and declaratory relief. The parties reached agreement to settle these lawsuits in the third quarter of 2021 for amounts that are not material to our financial results, which were paid in the fourth quarter of 2021. The settlement of these claims does not preclude potential future lawsuits.In July 2021, Hill-Rom, Inc.  received a subpoena (from the United States Office of Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services (the DHHS) requesting documents and information related to compliance with the False Claims Act and the Anti-Kickback Statute. Hillrom has been working with the DHHS and the DOJ to provide information responsive to the subpoena. Hillrom also voluntarily began a related internal review and Hillrom and now Baxter have been cooperating fully with the DHHS and the DOJ with respect to these matters. The DHHS often issues this type of subpoena when investigating alleged violations of the False Claims Act. On December 28, 2021, Linet Americas, Inc. (Linet) filed a complaint against Hill-Rom Holdings, Inc., Hill-Rom Company, Inc., and Hill-Rom Services, Inc. in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, captioned Linet Americas, Inc. v. Hill-Rom Holdings, Inc.; Hill-Rom Company, Inc.; Hill-Rom Services, Inc. Linet alleges that Hillrom violated Sections 1, 2 and 3 of The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 and the Illinois Antitrust Act by allegedly engaging in anti-competitive conduct in alleged markets for standard, ICU and birthing beds. Hillrom filed an answer to the complaint on January 28, 2022.76
