News & Analysis as of

Manufacturers Judicial Authority

MG+M The Law Firm

Wisconsin Supreme Court Ruling on PFAS Leaves Businesses Vulnerable and Overextends Agency Power

MG+M The Law Firm on

In a contentious 5–2 decision, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has dealt an unprecedented blow to the state’s business and manufacturing sector by ruling that the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) can force cleanup of PFAS...more

Cozen O'Connor

Democratic AGs Take Aim at ATF’s Decision to Distribute Firearm Triggers

Cozen O'Connor on

A group of 16 Democratic AGs filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the decision by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to redistribute thousands of Forced Reset Triggers (FRTs) throughout the...more

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP

D.C. District Court Declines Manufacturers’ Unilateral Efforts to Move Forward with Proposed 340B Rebate Models

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP on

Last month, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (the “District Court”) evaluated Motions for Summary Judgment concerning drug manufacturers’ efforts to unilaterally pay 340B Program discounts in the...more

Goodwin

Federal Court Affirms HRSA Authority to Preapprove 340B Rebate Models but Urges HRSA to Reconsider Rejection of Rebate Model

Goodwin on

In a May 15, 2025, opinion, Judge Dabney Friedrich of the US District Court for the District of Columbia denied drugmakers’ motions for summary judgment against the US Department of Health and Human Services and the Health...more

ArentFox Schiff

District Court Dismisses Manufacturer Lawsuit Challenging Colorado Price Setting for Prescription Drug

ArentFox Schiff on

There are currently six states with active Prescription Drug Affordability Boards (PDABs) — Colorado, Maryland, Washington, Oregon, New Hampshire, and Minnesota....more

A&O Shearman

New CJEU ruling on the borderline between medicinal products and medical devices: Key takeaways

A&O Shearman on

The boundary between medicinal products and medical devices remains a recurring issue for companies developing or marketing borderline products and courts, which has already been the subject of numerous decisions. Recently,...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Third Circuit Clarifies Next Steps in Fosamax Decision

On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has in turn remanded the case to the district court to determine whether state law claims are preempted by federal law in the 500+...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Worth the Wait? Some Semi-Mature Thoughts on Albrecht

For some long-awaited events, a little time and distance can add a measure of clarity. Not always – many still are processing the Game of Thrones finale, with no end in sight. But over the past few weeks pharmaceutical...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Class Dismissed

Supreme Court Decides Prescription Drug Preemption Case in Favor of Drug Manufacturer

The United States Supreme Court finally clarified its 11-year-old “clear evidence” standard for pharmaceutical preemption.  In its much-anticipated opinion delivered by Justice Breyer, the Court unanimously reversed the Third...more

Morgan Lewis

Supreme Court Clarifies Judges Must Decide Impossibility Pre-Emption

Morgan Lewis on

The US Supreme Court held on May 20 that a judge, not a jury, must decide the question of whether federal law prohibited drug manufacturers from adding warnings to the drug label that would satisfy state law. To succeed on a...more

Hogan Lovells

U.S. Supreme Court rules judges must decide whether preemption applies, and clarifies when it does

Hogan Lovells on

Opinion highlights importance of a "clear" record at FDA - On 20 May the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that federal preemption questions arising under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) are for a...more

McDermott Will & Emery

US Supreme Court Refines Impossibility Preemption Doctrine, Changes Litigation Dynamics

McDermott Will & Emery on

Following confusion from a 2009 decision, the US Supreme Court on May 20, 2019, decided a significant impossibility preemption case. This new decision will change the dynamics of litigation involving the impossibility...more

Jones Day

Supreme Court Sides with Merck in Unanimous Fosamax® Product-Liability Decision

Jones Day on

The Situation: Name-brand pharmaceutical manufacturers are often sued with claims that they should have strengthened the warnings on their labels, even where (as here) the Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") would not allow...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht (2019)

Last week, in Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, the Supreme Court continued its explication of the balance between state law tort liability that can be imposed on drug makers and the extent to which this liability can be...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

Supreme Court Reiterates That Federal Law Preemption For Product Warnings Is A Matter For Judge, Not Jury

Husch Blackwell LLP on

On Monday, the United States Supreme Court found that a judge is better suited than a jury to decide if consumers’ tort claims are preempted by federal regulations. In the case, Merck Sharp & Dome, Corp. v. Albreecht, the...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Implied Preemption in Prescription Drug Cases

Troutman Pepper Locke on

On May 20, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its latest opinion on preemption in cases involving prescription medications, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, No. 17-290 (U.S. May 20, 2019). ...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Judges to Decide Whether Manufacturers Meet “Clear Evidence” Impossibility Preemption Standard, Supreme Court Says

The U.S. Supreme Court issued its potentially most significant preemption decision in several years, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albright, 587 U.S. ____ (2019), reversing what some had dubbed the worst drug and device...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht

On May 20, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, No. 17-290, holding that the judge, not the jury, must decide whether state-law failure-to-warn claims are preempted by...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Labeling Preemption Questions are for the Court, not the Jury, Holds U.S. Supreme Court in Fosamax Decision That Clarifies the...

A judge, and not the jury, is the better-positioned and appropriate decisionmaker to determine whether a failure-to-warn claim is federally preempted, the U.S. Supreme Court held on Monday, May 20, 2019. The Court also...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