The United States Food and Drug Administration is the oldest consumer protection agency in the United States. The agency was not officially known as the FDA until 1930, but its regulatory functions began with... more +
The United States Food and Drug Administration is the oldest consumer protection agency in the United States. The agency was not officially known as the FDA until 1930, but its regulatory functions began with the passage of the 1906 Pure Food and Drugs Act. The agency is charged with protecting the integrity of the nation's food supply and cosmetic products, as well as monitoring the safety and efficacy of drugs, medical devices, and biological products.
Bleeding Deaths Linked to Pradaxa
Lawsuits Claim SSRIs Can Cause Severe Birth Defects
Monster Energy Drink Accused of Teen Death
Digital Health: Where is the Action for Entrepreneurs?
In This Issue: - Can Experts Testify as to the Ethics or State of Mind of Corporate Defendants? - Patent Reform for Biotech Companies - United States v. Caronia and its Implications for Off-Label...more
As we recently reported, federal regulators have continued to take measures aimed at stymieing the growth of the marijuana industry. Medical marijuana is now legal in over 18 states and, in November 2012, voters in Colorado...more
Executive Summary - On May 13, 2013, generic drug manufacturer Ranbaxy USA Inc. (Ranbaxy), a subsidiary of Indian generic drug manufacturer Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited, pled guilty to seven felony charges as part of a...more
Recent public discussion about the federal role in regulating compounding pharmacies has focused on compounded drugs for human use. Compounded drugs are also vital to companion animal health (like pets). In the world of...more
In This Issue: - Firm News: DoJ Star Healthcare Fraud Prosecutor Joins Washington, D.C. Office; and Quinn Emanuel Wins Top Honors at the Inaugural U.S. Benchmark Annual Awards - Main...more
I had the following email exchange earlier this year with a concerned client: Client (in late January 2013): "Hi Steve, I was wondering if you knew of any cases where employees were prosecuted for not following...more
For years, the U.S. Department of Justice has aggressively pursued and brought charges over “off-label promotions”—the promotion of drugs for uses that have not received FDA approval—by pharmaceutical manufacturers and their...more
The Sixth Circuit recently held that a failure-to-warn claim could proceed against a generic manufacturer that had failed to timely follow the brand-name label. Fulgenzi v. Pliva Inc., Case No. 12-3504 (6th Cir. March 13,...more
[Ed. The Supreme Court heard oral argument today in Federal Trade Commission v. Watson Pharmaceuticals. While Patent Docs will provide analysis regarding the oral argument in a subsequent post, we provide the following...more
On March 7, 2013, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning letter to compounding pharmacy Medi-Fare Drug & Home Health Center (Medi-Fare Drug), taking the FDA's most aggressive position to date...more
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States held oral argument in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. v. Bartlett, a follow-up to its landmark ruling in PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing, 131 S. Ct. 2567 (2011), which addressed federal...more
Following the Second Circuit’s marquee First Amendment ruling in the Caronia case, two recent developments demonstrate a shift in the battleground for First Amendment challenges to the prohibition on off-label promotion under...more
Over the past two years, courts began to recognize that at least some off-label marketing is protected lawful commercial speech under the First Amendment. Specifically, the Second Circuit in New York in a case called United...more
On February 19, 2013, FDA issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register, re-proposing amendments regarding information about pediatric subpopulations that must be submitted for certain medical...more
After the Second Circuit’s split decision in U.S. v. Caronia, holding that truthful off-label marketing is protected under the First Amendment and thus cannot be prosecuted under the misbranding provisions of the Food Drug...more
On December 3, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the First Amendment protects pharmaceutical companies who truthfully promote the lawful, off-label use of prescription drugs from...more
Last week the Ninth Circuit created a new state-law cause of action against medical device manufacturers: “failure to warn the FDA.” The en banc opinion in Stengel v. Medtronic Inc., __ F.3d __, 2013 WL 106144, 13 C.D.O.S....more
As we previously reported, President Obama signed the Food Safety and Modernization Act (“FSMA“) in January 2011 to help ensure the safety and security of foods in the United States. On January 7, 2013, the U.S. Food and...more
The U.S. government may be resurrecting the "Park Doctrine" as a tool to prosecute the owners of pharmacies for federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) violations. In United States v. Park, 421 U.S. 658 (1975), the U.S....more
Alfred Caronia was a sales rep for a pharmaceutical company. And, despite what you might think by reading some of the literature, being a pharmaceutical sales rep is not a crime. It's even more emphatically not a crime after...more
On December 3, 2012, a panel of three judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit overturned the November 2009 conviction of Alfred Caronia for conspiracy to introduce a misbranded drug into interstate commerce...more
Last week, the IRS and the Treasury Department published final regulations regarding the medical device excise tax under § 4191 of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC). IRC § 4191, which was enacted by the Health Care and...more
Beginning January 1, 2013, manufacturers, producers, and importers of medical devices must report and pay a 2.3% excise tax on the sales price of taxable medical device pursuant to Section 4191 of the Internal Revenue Code...more
On December 3, 2012, a divided Second Circuit held in United States v. Caronia (“Caronia”) that the misbranding provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”) do not criminalize “the truthful off-label...more
In this issue: - It’s Easier Being Green - Off-Label Marketing Protected by First Amendment - Understanding New Restrictions on Advertising GI Bill Benefits - FTC Looks at "The Big Picture" - Upcoming...more
JD Supra gets your content noticed, increases your visibility and makes your marketing efforts hassle free...
Learn More or Schedule a demo