News & Analysis as of

A Short-Lived Victory for Generic Drug Manufacturers?

On June 24, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. Inc. v. Bartlett, 570 U.S. ____ (2013), finding that design-defect claims against generic drug companies are pre-empted where...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

A Narrow Exception To The Mensing Preemption Defense

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

Breaking Down The Bartlett Oral Argument

The U.S. Supreme Court has heard oral argument in the much-anticipated Mutual Pharmaceuticals v. Bartlett case, No. 12-142 (on appeal from the First Circuit Bartlett v. Mutual Pharms. Co., 678 F.3d 30 (1st Cir. 2012)). The...more

"Complex Mass Tort Product Liability Alert: Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument Regarding Scope of Generic Drug Preemption"

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

Stengel Tangles MDA Preemption: Ninth Circuit Decision Creates Split on Buckman Preemption of Post-Market Reporting Requirements

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

7 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1