At a Stated Term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 25th day of August, two thousand twenty-one.

United Food And Commercial Workers Local 1776 & Participating Employers Health And Welfare Fund, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 178 Health & Welfare Trust Fund, 199 SEIU-National Benefit Fund, Fraternal Order of Police, Fort Lauderdale Lodge 31, Insurance Trust Fund, Crosby Tugs, LLC, International Union of Operating Engineers Local 132 Health and Welfare Fund, A.F.

Buildings Trade Welfare Plan, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Painters District Council No. 30 Health and Welfare Fund, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, NECA-IBEW Welfare Trust Fund, individually and on behalf of all others similarly sitiated, City of Providence, Rhode Island individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Minnesota and North Dakota Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers Health Fund, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Greater Metropolitan Hotel Employers-Employees Health and Welfare Fund, on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated, Local 17 Hospitality Benefit Fund, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, New England Electrical Workers Benefit Fund, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Dennis Kreish, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Man-U Service Contract Trust Fund, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Teamsters Union Local 115 Health & Welfare Fund, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs - Appellees,

The appeal in the above captioned case from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York was argued on the district court’s record and the parties’ briefs.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the district court’s denial of Takeda’s motion to dismiss is AFFIRMED and the case is REMANDED to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this Court’s opinion.