Federal Court Strikes Down FDA Rule on LDTs - Thought Leaders in Health Law®
Podcast - Hot Topics in FDA Regulation: GLP-1s, LDTs, AI and More
Prescribing GLP-1 Medications: Be Aware of Legal Limitations
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 22: What Global Companies Need to Know About Navigating FDA Regulations and U.S. Market Entry
AI and Pharmacovigilance Under the FDA's New Emerging Drug Safety Technology Program – The Good Bot Podcast
GLP-1 Drugs and Cultivated Meat: What’s the Impact on the Food and Agriculture Industry?
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 202: Life Sciences Startups and Industry Developments with Gil Price, Life Sciences Leader
The Future of Laboratory Testing Just Got a Little Clearer: FDA's Final Rule on LDTs – Diagnosing Health Care
Video: Food for Thought and Thoughts on Food: Innovating USDA Science with Sanah Baig, Deputy Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics
The FDA's Response to AI Medical Innovation — The Good Bot Podcast
FDA Releases Laboratory-Developed Tests Final Rule – Thought Leaders in Health Law
Litigating Nutrition: Class Action Battles Over Dietary Supplements – Speaking of Litigation Video Podcast
Changes in FDA, Cannabis Policies and AI Developments
Ad Law Tool Kit Show – Episode 2 – Marketing FDA-Regulated Products
Medical Device Legal News with Sam Bernstein: Episode 18
Medical Device Legal News with Sam Bernstein: Episode 17
A Look Into the FDA and USDA Regulatory Regimes
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 167: Dr. Ehsan Samei & Dr. Susan Halabi, Triangle CERSI
Podcast: Dietary Supplements – Navigating the Regulatory Maze – Diagnosing Health Care
Private equity investors in health care and life sciences must navigate a complex and shifting landscape influenced by regulatory and policy changes and technological advancements. As private equity investments in the health...more
This month the Supreme Court denied certiorari on Edwards Lifesciences Corp. v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., and in doing so, seemingly indicated its support for a broad interpretation of the Hatch-Waxman safe harbor...more
I recently learned of Eli Lilly & Co.’s (“Lilly”) recent lawsuit against FDA from Nicole DeFeudis, who interviewed me for her Endpoints News story about the case. Lilly’s lawsuit, filed in September 2024 in the Southern...more
Life sciences companies are adding risk factor language in response to the U.S. Supreme Court overturning the Chevron Doctrine. As you may recall, the U.S. Supreme Court recently overturned the Chevron Doctrine....more
Welcome to our third issue of The Health Record - our healthcare law insights e-newsletter! We are winding down the summer with our talented group of law students and they have continued to research and write, shadow...more
Under the Chevron doctrine, FDA and other agencies had significant flexibility to set policy where Congress left a gap or failed to speak clearly when enacting legislation—a common occurrence given the at-times sparse...more
In a landmark decision on June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court overturned a 40-year-old legal precedent known as Chevron deference. Established in 1984, Chevron deference mandated that judges defer to federal agencies concerning...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has issued its highly anticipated decision overturning the 40-year old doctrine established in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, which recognized judicial deference to administrative...more
“Chevron is overruled.” The U.S. Supreme Court’s June 28 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and its companion case, Relentless v. Department of Commerce, will have enormous effects on the healthcare sector....more
On June 28, in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Supreme Court overturned the longstanding Chevron doctrine, under which courts generally granted deference to a federal agency’s reasonable interpretation of ambiguous...more
Since 1984, the “Chevron doctrine” had served as the bedrock of many regulatory actions by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and other federal agencies. Under the doctrine, courts followed a two-step...more
Mifepristone is safe for now. On June 13, 2024, the Supreme Court unanimously held that the plaintiffs — doctors and medical associations alike — lacked standing to challenge 2000 and 2019 FDA approvals of mifepristone (brand...more
In a decision joined by all nine justices, the Supreme Court preserved the Food and Drug Administration’s (“FDA’s”) regulatory approval of mifepristone, ensuring continued access to the widely-used abortion medication across...more
On May 15, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States denied Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.’s (“Teva”) petition for certiorari in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline, LLC, ending a nearly nine-year court...more
The Supreme Court of the United States has denied certiorari in the Teva v. GSK “skinny labeling” case, leaving intact the Federal Circuit’s August 2021 decision, which we summarized online here. In the article below, we...more
Yesterday, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline, LLC, 22-37, locking in the Federal Circuit’s second panel decision (hereafter “GSK v. Teva”), which held that Teva’s attempted...more
On April 7, 2023, two federal judges in Texas and Washington State issued dueling opinions about the abortion medication Mifepristone, just hours apart. These two decisions come in the midst of growing tension about abortion...more
On June 25, 2020, the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a brief in the United States Supreme Court that reverses the government’s prior position by arguing that none of the provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable...more
On October 22, 2019, Skadden hosted our Ninth Annual Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Enforcement and Litigation Seminar in New York, which focused on U.S. enforcement issues companies face throughout the industry. The key...more
On June 12, 2017, in a unanimous decision authored by Justice Thomas in Amgen Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., the United States Supreme Court considered the complex statutory scheme that attempts to expedite resolution of patent...more
On Monday, June 12, 2017, the United States Supreme Court in a unanimous decision held that manufacturers making biosimilars of biologic drugs did not have to wait until after gaining federal approval of the biosimilar to...more
On January 13, 2017, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Amgen v. Sandoz, 794. F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2015) and Sandoz v. Amgen, 773 F.3d 1274 (Fed. Cir. 2014), appealed from the Federal Circuit. The petitions involve the...more
On Friday, January 13, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Amgen v. Sandoz (Nos. 15-1039 & 15-1195). The Supreme Court originally deferred its decision on the parties’ certiorari petitions in order to consider the...more
The Supreme Court has been asked to review whether the safe harbor established by 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1) encompasses a generic drug manufacturer’s bioequivalence testing performed only as a condition of maintaining FDA...more
On Monday, June 20, 2016, the Supreme Court deferred a decision on the certiorari petitions filed by both parties from the Federal Circuit’s decision in Amgen v. Sandoz, 794 F.3d 1347 (2015), and instead called for the views...more