Find this week’s updates on 340B litigation to help you stay in the know on how 340B cases are developing across the country. Each week we comb through the dockets of more than 50 340B cases to provide you with a quick summary of relevant updates from the prior week in this industry-shaping body of litigation. Get more details on these 340B cases and all other material 340B cases pending in federal and state courts with the 340B Litigation Tracker.
Issues at Stake: Contract Pharmacy; Other
- In a case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Colorado state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a response to the motion to dismiss. (Contract Pharmacy)
- In a case brought by a covered entity against the government, the government filed a memorandum in opposition to the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. (Other)
- A drug manufacturer filed a complaint against the Attorney General of New Mexico to challenge a New Mexico law governing contract pharmacy arrangements. (Contract Pharmacy)
- A 340B Covered Entity filed a complaint against the government to challenge the government’s policy regarding GPO arrangements. (Other)
- A 340B Covered Entity filed a breach of contract claim against an insurer. (Other)
- In a case against HRSA challenging its certification of a group of entities as 340B-eligible, plaintiffs filed a response in opposition to an intervenor’s motion to intervene. (Other)
- In a case challenging a South Dakota law, plaintiffs filed reply in support of their motion for a preliminary injunction. (Contract Pharmacy)
- In a case challenging a Vermont law, plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction with a request for oral argument. (Contract Pharmacy)
[View source.]
