Conflict of Laws Products Liability Civil Procedure

Read Conflict of Laws updates, alerts, news, and analysis from leading lawyers and law firms:
News & Analysis as of

Food Litigation Newsletter - August 2014

In This Issue: - Recent Significant Rulings ..Court Dismisses Most of plaintiff’s Claims Based on Regulatory Violations ..Court Dismisses MSG Claims in Part on Preemption Grounds ..Court Partially...more

Supreme Court Reinforces Need for Robust Adverse Event Reporting Process

On June 23, 2014, the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari in Medtronic, Inc. v. Stengel, leaving in place the Ninth Circuit's en banc decision permitting a failure-to-warn claim against a pre-market approval (PMA)...more

Supreme Court Decision May Lead to More False Advertising Claims in Food and Beverage Industry

The Supreme Court's ruling in Pom Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co. may open the door to more false advertising claims regarding food and beverage labeling....more

The Supreme Court Gives Juice To Lanham Act Claims

The Supreme Court’s unanimous opinion in POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co. (Dkt. No. 12-761) (June 12, 2014) highlights the key role of Lanham Act false advertising claims in protecting consumers from misleading advertising...more

POM v. Coke Does Not Alter The Landscape for Food False Advertising Class Actions

After the oral argument in POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co., No. 12-761, the Supreme Court appeared all but certain to allow competitors to sue for false advertising under the Lanham Act over labels of FDA-regulated food...more

Recent Supreme Court Decision on “Truth-in-Labeling” Has Far-Reaching Implications

On April 28, 2014, we reported on the United States Supreme Court’s involvement in the juice-labeling lawsuit between POM Wonderful LLC (“POM”) and Coca-Cola (“Coke”). In POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co. (“POM”), POM sued...more

U.S. Supreme Court: Pom’s Mislabeling Suit Against Coke Not Precluded by FDA Regulations

Recently, the Supreme Court ruled, 8-0, that Pom Wonderful LLC could pursue mislabeling claims under the federal Lanham Act against the Coca-Cola Company, even though the label at issue complied with FDA labeling regulations....more

Supreme Court Holds That Lanham Act False Advertising Claims Are Not Preempted by FDCA

Earlier today, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that a Lanham Act false advertising case may be brought even if Food and Drug Administration (FDA) beverage labeling regulations permit use of the challenged claim....more

Supreme Court Decides POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co.

Petitioner POM Wonderful LLC makes and sells juice products, including a pomegranate-blueberry juice blend. Coca-Cola Company makes a juice blend with a label that prominently displays the words "pomegranate" and "blueberry"...more

U.S. Supreme Court Allows Pom Wonderful to Pursue Lanham Act Claims against Coca-Cola

Further to our April 23 post on the Pom Wonderful-Coca-Cola U.S. Supreme Court case, the Court on Thursday June 12 issued an unanimous decision (with Justice Breyer taking no part in the consideration or decision of the...more

Watch your P's and Q's... - Supreme Court Clears the Path for False Advertising Suit against Coca-Cola

The Supreme Court issued an 8-0 decision yesterday unanimously holding that compliance with federal labeling statutes cannot be used as a defense to lawsuits by competitors for false advertising under the Lanham Act....more

Food Companies Should Expect More False Advertising Claims

The Supreme Court holds that competitors may bring Lanham Act claims challenging food and beverage labels that are regulated by the FDA....more

Another California Court Does Backflips To Thwart Arbitration And Elevate The Class-Action Device

The hostility of some California courts to arbitration—and their resistance to preemption under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA)—has produced nearly three decades of U.S. Supreme Court reversals. The most recent is AT&T...more

Delayed Discovery Cannot Cure Defective Pre-Litigation Investigations for Proposition 65 Suits

A California appellate court recently determined that a consumer group’s failure to conduct required pre-litigation investigations of several restaurant chains’ alleged Proposition 65 violations warranted dismissal of the...more

$4 Billion Price Tag for Pleasing Plaintiffs' Bar? New Study Estimates Costs of FDA's Proposed Rule on Generic Drug Labeling

An economic consulting group recently published findings that a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed rule will increase annual healthcare costs by $4 billion. The FDA's proposal, announced in November 2013, would allow...more

Food Litigation Newsletter - February 2014

In This Issue: - Recent Significant Developments and Rulings ..Smart Balance Milk Labeling Suit Not Preempted ..Mott’s “No Sugar Added” Labeling Lawsuit Narrowed ..Court Preliminarily Approves Trader...more

Judicial Notice of FDA Website Documents Can Be a Powerful Lever in a Medical Device Manufacturer’s Motion to Dismiss

A motion to dismiss can be a powerful tool in the hands of medical device companies to eliminate cases that should be dismissed from the outset on preemption grounds, before engaging in costly discovery. Oftentimes, however,...more

A Short-Lived Victory for Generic Manufacturers? – Part 2

In our prior blog post of the same title on July 5, 2013, we predicted that the protection from product liability/failure to warn litigation for generic manufacturers as a result of the Supreme Court decision in Mutual...more

Careful What You Say – No Preemption for Statements Made in Operating Room

Makers of medical devices marketed pursuant to the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) premarket approval process are generally relieved from defending state law failure to warn claims by operation of express preemption, a...more

New FDA Rule on Drug Labeling May Mean Increased Exposure and an Uncertain Path for Generic Pharmaceutical Manufacturers

Litigation over the labeling of pharmaceuticals dates back to the mid-1800s. In only the last five years, however, two watershed decisions by the United States Supreme Court have established clear, albeit controversial,...more

Federal Preemption Rules and Insufficient Pleading Results in Dismissal of Plaintiff’s Off-Label Claims

In a recent decision issuing from the Central District of California, the court evaluated requirements pertaining to federal preemption and pleading, and granted Medtronic, Inc. and Medtronic Sofamor Danek, USA, Inc.’s...more

A victory for generics suppliers

In late June the Supreme Court issued its ruling in the much-anticipated Mutual Pharms. Co. v. Bartlett, No. 12-142 (on appeal from the First Circuit Bartlett v. Mutual Pharms. Co., 678 F.3d 30 (1st Cir. 2012)). As we...more

Pre-Emption of State-Law Design-Defect Claim Against Generic Drug Company

On June 24, 2013, in a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co., Inc. v. Bartlett held that state-law design-defect claims based on the inadequacy of a generic drug’s labeled warnings are pre-empted...more

Generic Drug Preemption Expanded by Supreme Court's Bartlett Decision

Not surprisingly, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the broad preemptive scope of PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing, 131 S. Ct. 2567 (2011), and further extended the reach of impossibility preemption to design defect claims, in issuing its...more

Supreme Court Rejects ‘Stop-Selling’ Argument in Conflict Preemption Cases

In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the notion that a manufacturer’s option to stop selling its product resolves preemption concerns raised by conflicting state and federal laws....more

104 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 5

Follow Conflict of Laws Updates on: