Remove 2009 Remove Doctors Remove Pharmaceuticals Remove Treatment
article thumbnail

Marquis Who’s Who Honors James D. McChesney, PhD, with Inclusion in Who’s Who in the World

The Pharma Data

McChesney is the founder and chief executive officer of Cloaked Therapeutics and Arbor Therapeutics, through which he has drawn on more than five decades of research in natural products chemistry to identify and develop novel cancer treatments. In 2009, he established Ironstone Separations Inc.,

article thumbnail

CPAP MDL Overinflates Plaintiffs’ Claims

Drug & Device Law

Abuse of substantive law as a weapon to force settlement occurs so frequently in multidistrict litigation (“MDL”), that we’ve given it a name – “the MDL treatment.” The linchpin of the MDL treatment is that plaintiffs are allowed to take way more liberties with state law than the Erie doctrine allows. 662, 679 (2009).

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Another RICOdiculous Decision

Drug & Device Law

We’ve discussed recently how a federal statute intended to allow suits against international terrorists has been misapplied as allowing suits against pharmaceutical companies. Takeda Pharmaceuticals Co. , Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. , at *6 (plaintiff “has documents and formularies reaching back to only 2009”). 3d at 1251.

article thumbnail

Agree To Disagree – Don’t  Sue the Other Side of a Scientific Dispute into Silence

Drug & Device Law

Supporting scientific articles as First Amendment-supported speech, here in 2009. Ridiculing a blatantly unconstitutional Missouri statute that sought to silence pharmacists critical of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine as treatments for COVID-19, just yesterday. We have tried to be consistent. 2022 WL 336585 (D.

article thumbnail

A Primer on Alternative Design

Drug & Device Law

Plaintiffs claimed that “surgical treatments that do not use [bone] screws should be considered alternative designs,” and lost. The problem with this argument is that it really takes issue with the choice of treatment made by [plaintiff’s] physician, not with a specific fault of the [bone] screws sold by [the defendant]. 3d 760 (Tex.

FDA 59
article thumbnail

Confident Learned Intermediaries Defeat Warning Causation

Drug & Device Law

Thus a confident learned intermediary’s testimony will defeat causation as a matter of law by stating that, notwithstanding a poor result, the treatment provided was standard of care, and even in hindsight they would not do anything different. 2009), reversed a plaintiff’s verdict for entry of judgment n.o.v. Schering Corp. ,

article thumbnail

Unimpressed Learned Intermediaries Defeat Warning Causation

Drug & Device Law

The law presumes that licensed doctors know what they are doing. 1978), where a hypertensive patient was injured after being injected with the defendant’s drug – despite warnings that “expressly directed the doctor administering the drug to refrain from giving it to a patient with hypertension.” at *3 (emphasis original).