News & Analysis as of

Cancer Appeals

Bennett Jones LLP

Court of Appeal Cuts Off Speculative Product Liability Claims

Bennett Jones LLP on

In 2024, Ontario’s highest court affirmed the principle that a certifiable tort claim requires a plaintiff to provide some basis in fact for a present, materialized injury that is “sufficiently serious.” A legally compensable...more

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Upholds Preliminary Injunction Barring Sale Of Cancer Test

A&O Shearman on

On July 12, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) affirmed a decision by the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina granting a preliminary injunction that barred...more

ArentFox Schiff

Prop 65 Roundup - December 2023

ArentFox Schiff on

Third Time’s A Charm: California Re-Introduces Proposed Changes to Proposition 65’s Warnings and Safe Harbor Requirements - On October 27, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), the lead...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Product Liability Update - September 2023

Foley Hoag LLP on

Foley Hoag LLP publishes this quarterly Update primarily concerning developments in product liability and related law from federal and state courts applicable to Massachusetts, but also featuring selected developments for New...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Sue Generous and the Laws of Legal Physics: Preventing Asbestos Mission Creep in California Courts

It is virtually a law of legal physics in California that liability tends to expand until a critical mass of appellate courts rule that it has reached its limit, or the Supreme Court puts up a stop sign (a vanishingly rare...more

Knobbe Martens

Cancer Drug Patent Not Dead Yet

Knobbe Martens on

(Mar. 31, 2022) Last Friday, ImmunoGen won an appeal at the Federal Circuit in ImmunoGen, Inc. v. Hirshfeld. The lawsuit is a civil action to order the granting of U.S. Application No. 14/509,809 (‘809), titled “Anti-FOLR...more

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC

Federal Appeals Court Hears Arguments on CAR T-Cell Therapy Patent Dispute

T-Cell Therapies offer enormous promise in the development of novel approaches to treating cancer. A federal appeals court recently heard arguments in a patent dispute between two companies that have emerged as leaders in...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

Toxic Tort Monitor: Proximate Cause Jury Instruction Further Clarified By Washington Appellate Court

Husch Blackwell LLP on

Proximate cause jury instruction was further clarified by a Washington appellate court when the court reversed the asbestos defense verdict in Clevenger v. John Crane, Inc. In the case, plaintiff Era Clevenger alleged that...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Product Liability Update - August 2020

Foley Hoag LLP on

Foley Hoag LLP publishes this quarterly Update primarily concerning developments in product liability and related law from federal and state courts applicable to Massachusetts, but also featuring selected developments for New...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Independently Performed, Publicly Disclosed Prior Work Can Lead to Joint Inventorship

Addressing an inventorship decision that added two co-inventors to patents covering cancer treatments, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed that the co-inventors’ work constituted joint inventorship even...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

Toxic Tort Monitor: Missouri Court Of Appeals Vacates $110 Million Ovarian Cancer Talc Verdict

Husch Blackwell LLP on

Recently, a Missouri Court of Appeals vacated a trial court’s award of $110 million in an ovarian cancer talc case, Slemp v. Johnson & Johnson, ED 106190 (Mo. Ct. App. Oct. 15, 2019). This is the third talc verdict handed...more

BCLP

California Prop. 65 Regulation Exempts Certain Coffee Chemicals From Cancer Warning; Stay in Coffee Case Lifted

BCLP on

California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (“OEHHA”) has finalized a highly anticipated Proposition 65 regulation relating to coffee. The regulation, California Code of Regulations Section 25704, takes...more

Buchalter

New Life For A Dormant Defense: Do Proposition 65 Warnings Violate The First Amendment?

Buchalter on

Can you be forced to slap language on a product you sell that not only do you not agree with but which can be false or misleading – and scare your customers? In California the answer is yes. But that may be finally...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Voluntarily Sharing Family’s Cancer History Bars GINA Claims, Court Holds

GINA—that elusive law about employers collecting genetic information that rarely comes up. What if an employee voluntarily shares his genetic history—can he turn around and claim his employer improperly acquired the genetic...more

Allen Matkins

Court Holds International Cancer Agency Is Not A Private Corporation

Allen Matkins on

More than a half century ago, the World Health Assembly established the International Agency for Research on Cancer as the specialized cancer agency of the World Health Organization. Although headquartered in Lyon, France,...more

Downey Brand LLP

The Latest in the Prop. 65 World: Processed Meat; Lead and Cadmium in Chocolate; and Glyphosate in Herbicides

Downey Brand LLP on

February was a busy month in the Proposition 65 world with two developments that may impact businesses that manufacture or sell processed meat or chocolate products. In addition, the United States District Court for the...more

Polsinelli

Missouri Court Vacates Talc Verdict: Cites Lack of Personal Jurisdiction

Polsinelli on

Vacating a $72 million talc verdict against Johnson & Johnson, the Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, held that the case should never have been tried in the City of St. Louis, Missouri. The plaintiff did not live in...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

The “D” in the ADA Still Exists, Court of Appeals Reminds Us

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

In 2009, Congress passed the Americans With Disabilities Amendments Act (ADAAA), unquestionably expanding the definition of a disability under the ADA and, for all practical purposes in most cases, shifting the focus of...more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

Plaintiff’s Mere Presence in Area Where Asbestos is Present Insufficient to Establish Bystander Exposure

In Schiffer v. CBS Corporation (filed 9/9/15; modified 9/30/15), the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, affirmed summary judgment in favor of the defendant asbestos insulation manufacturer finding...more

19 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide