It’s been a while since we’ve taken a comprehensive look at how TwIqbal’s been affecting prescription medical product liability pleading. We’ve done lots of posts about this or that case, but we haven’t synthesized anything lately - like in a year. So today we thought we’d take a look at exactly what’s been held insufficiently pleaded and why. For convenience, we took our research back a year (a little longer on some issues)

Of course, TwIqbal applies generally to bar complaints that plead nothing but legal conclusions. Salvio v. Amgen, Inc., ___ F. Supp.2d ___, 2011 WL 3651314, at *6-7 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 18, 2011); Tillman v. Taro Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., 2011 WL 3704762, at *4-6 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 17, 2011); Rollins v. Wackenhut Services Inc., ___ F. Supp.2d ___, 2011 WL 3489442, at *11-12 (D.D.C. Aug. 10, 2011); Henderson v. Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries, Ltd., 2011 WL 4024656, at *8 (N.D. Ga. June 9, 2011); Nimtz v. Cepin, 2011 WL 831182, at *4 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 3, 2011), dismissed with prejudice, 2011 WL 2160181 (S.D. Cal. June 1, 2011); Llado-Carreno v. Guidant Corp., 2011 WL 705403, at *3 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 22, 2011). But TwIqbal extends to a variety of particular, recurrent pleading flaws.