Remove 2008 Remove FDA Approval Remove Testimonials
article thumbnail

Malarkey ? The Ten Worst Prescription Drug/Medical Device Decisions of 2023

Drug & Device Law

Shikada is the first appellate decision creating a state-law warning-based duty (here, via a consumer protection claim, brought by the state rather than anyone actually claiming injury) based solely on pharmacogenomics − racially/ethnically-based genetic variations − allegedly affecting the effectiveness of FDA-approved prescription drugs.

article thumbnail

Not the Best Wisconsin Law Decision We’ve Ever Seen

Drug & Device Law

The surgeon’s testimony supported two grounds for non-causation: lack of reliance, and that a warning would not have changed how the prescription product was used. at *3 – which means, as we’ve discussed before , a manufacturer cannot include warnings about such off-label uses absent specific FDA approval. 2008); Herzog v.

article thumbnail

The FDA and Feasible Alternative Designs

Drug & Device Law

But in prescription medical product liability litigation, products must receive FDA approval, clearance or other authorization (hereafter, collectively referred to as “approval” for short) before they can be marketed. Lederle Laboratories , 2008 WL 972657 (W. In Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC , 562 U.S. at 237-38. 2d at 401.

FDA 59