article thumbnail

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

Drug & Device Law

Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. , Never mind that, since Bausch the Supreme Court has entertained preemption issues under Rule 12(b)(6) on multiple occasions, including the Mensing ( 2011+1 ) prescription drug preemption decision. Luitpold Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Geri-Care Pharmaceuticals Corp. , 3d , 2023 WL 4191651 (C.D.

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. , 3d 1243 (9th Cir. 1 (highlights). 3d at 1247. 3d , 2023 WL 4191651 (C.D.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Dealing with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s Non-Decision on Standards Compliance Evidence

Drug & Device Law

2011) (federal rules “control in this case because they are ‘arguably procedural’”) The issue to be decided here is whether the OSHA regulation is admissible in a diversity action as evidence of the standard of care owed by the defendants to the plaintiff. . . . Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. , See Covell v. Bell Sports, Inc. ,

article thumbnail

50-State Survey of State Court Decisions Supporting Expert-Related Judicial Gatekeeping

Drug & Device Law

We think that they can, and for a state (like Pennsylvania and a number of others) that still follows the “ Frye ” standard looking to the “general acceptance” of expert testimony as the touchstone to admissibility, a Rule 702 state-law equivalent might look something like this: Rule 702. E.g. , Walsh v. BASF Corp. , 3d 446, 461 (Pa.

article thumbnail

We Said It Before; We’ll Say It Again – Drug/Device Companies Should Join PLAC

Drug & Device Law

We return to a theme we’ve repeated twice before, in 2011 and in 2014 – that in addition to industry-specific groups, manufacturers of prescription medical products should definitely consider joining the Product Liability Advisory Council (“PLAC”). Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceutical, Inc. Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

article thumbnail

The BFDs – The Ten Best Prescription Drug/Medical Device Decisions of 2023

Drug & Device Law

2023) (remote trial testimony cannot be compelled beyond Rule 45’s 100-mile limit on subpoenas) ( here ); Carson v. 2023) (HHS cannot force pharmaceutical manufacturers to sell unlimited amounts of prescription drugs at a discount) ( here ). They excluded bogus expert testimony under Fed. Bonta , 85 F.4th 4th 1263 (9th Cir.

article thumbnail

The FDA and Feasible Alternative Designs

Drug & Device Law

223, 238 (2011), the United States Supreme Court reacted to a plaintiff’s unconstrained claims of “alternative” vaccine design: [T]he [design] decision is surely not an easy one. 7, 2022), which addressed the same question in the context of the admissibility of expert testimony. His testimony is thus irrelevant and inadmissible.

FDA 59