Oct 31 (Reuters) - A federal judge on Friday said 36

drugmakers and executives must face nearly all claims in an

antitrust lawsuit brought by most U.S. states, accusing them of

conspiring to fix prices of 80 generic drugs.

Chief Judge Michael Shea of the federal district court in

Connecticut rejected claims that 45 states, the District of

Columbia and four U.S. territories waited an unreasonably long

time to pursue federal antitrust claims, and missed formal

deadlines to file similar claims under state laws.

Led by Connecticut, the states accused drugmakers including

Pfizer ( PFE ), Perrigo ( PRGO ) and Sandoz of

conspiring to raise prices, limit competition and allocate

customers for drugs, primarily for skin ailments, between 2009

and 2016.

In a 130-page decision, Shea said the defendants failed to

show that the states "lacked diligence" in pursuing their case,

citing evidence that the defendants pursued "affirmative acts"

to conceal their alleged collusion.

"A reasonable juror could find that the defendants' 'blaming

supply,' making uncompetitively high bids, and falsely citing

production costs for increased prices were aimed at concealing

their alleged conspiracy," the Hartford-based judge wrote.

Lawyers for Pfizer ( PFE ), Perrigo ( PRGO ) and Sandoz did not immediately

respond to requests for comment after market hours. A

spokeswoman for Connecticut Attorney General William Tong did

not immediately respond to a similar request.

Brand names of some products in the case included the acne

medication Differin, anti-fungal medicine Lotrimin AF Cream, and

Ritalin for attention deficit disorder and attention deficit

hyperactivity disorder.

The case is Connecticut et al v. Sandoz Inc et al, U.S.

District Court, District of Connecticut, No. 20-00802.