This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
PAHPA has been reauthorized several times since its original passage, including as the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Reauthorization Act of 2013 (PAHPRA) and the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act of 2019 (PAHPAIA). In the 2013 version, the second “P” stood for “Preparedness.”
Testimonials are not necessarily representative of all of those who will use our products. Some of our testimonials are provided by customers who have received promotional offers in exchange for their participation. The testimonials displayed are given verbatim except for correction of grammatical or typing errors. 2012.11.002.
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently published a White Paper on Policy Considerations to Prevent Drug Shortages and Mitigate Supply Chain Vulnerabilities in the United States —with input from several HHS stakeholders, including FDA, CMS, and the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response. By Kalie E.
Merrick Garland, Testimony Before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mar. Attorneys in August 2013 that DOJ was unlikely to take enforcement action against marijuana-related businesses operating in compliance with state law unless the businesses implicated any one of eight enforcement priorities. 29, 2013), 3. 1, 2023 ( 02:38:46 ).
DSCSA implementation – Down to the wire as a deadline draws near: The Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA) was enacted in 2013 as part of the Drug Quality and Security Act (DQSA), following several drug counterfeiting scandals in which falsified medical products entered the supply chain.
Gibbs — A recent blog post focused on the potentially negative implications of the proposed Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA) for manufacturers of generic drugs and biosimilar products. Javitt & Jeffrey N. The concerns raised by PERA are not limited to these industries, however.
Considering the rigorousness of this process and the due process interests of drug sponsors, Congress also mandated by statute a process for withdrawal or suspension of an FDA approval decision − a process the Fifth Circuit circumvented. 19, 2021) (admitting and excluding Studnicki testimony); Whole Woman’s Health Alliance v.
As drug and device defense lawyers today, we use that skill to find the one version of plaintiff’s story that just doesn’t line up. Like when written discovery responses say one thing, medical records say the same thing, plaintiff’s deposition testimony is also the same, but a post deposition affidavit says something completely different.
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.
Speaking of cold and darkness, it is now time for us to look back upon the results of drug and medical device litigation during 2023 and to select the ten worst decisions of the year. 2023), was the Fifth Circuit’s blatantly politicized attack on the FDA’s regulation of abortion-related drugs. FDA , 78 F.4th 4th 210 (5th Cir.
The Granuflo/Naturalyte MDL (“ G/N ”) was created a decade ago, in 2013. W]ith considerable testimony from their own experts that all of the plaintiffs fell within an acceptable range, they have failed to adduce competent evidence in support of their claims. 2d 1362 (J.P.M.L G/N , 2023 WL 5807340, at *16 (citations omitted).
In the “ 50-State Survey of State Court Decisions Supporting Expert-Related Judicial Gatekeeping ,” the Drug & Device Law Blog (the Best Blog on the Planet) describes West Virginia as a “gatekeeper” state because of cases reflecting adoption of the Daubert analysis of W. 2013) (citation and quotation marks omitted). “We.
Back during the diet drug litigation, we had cases with very significant alleged injuries and a colorable argument that the label was inaccurate as to the risk of the plaintiffs’ injuries. If the drug had not been sold at the time, then it did not matter what the prescribers thought. 472 (2013). Bartlett , 570 U.S.
2013) (Painter); McClellan v. While cosmetic talc is not a drug or medical device, the FDA also regulates it (the “C” in the FDCA). Moline has given testimony in many other cosmetic talc cases” while keeping the (at least potentially) false premise of her article secret supported disclosure of the contrary evidence. 11-17 (Jan.
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. Confident learned intermediaries stand by their medical decisions. Medrano , 28 S.W.3d 3d 75 (Fla.
That means that prescribers can make risk/benefit analyses to determine what prescription drugs or medical devices their patients need. The prescriber’s] testimony, however, does not establish that he would have altered his prescribing conduct. That “common and widely known side effect” of many “chemotherapy drugs,” id.
A lot of the discussion in Tsao was case specific because the purported expert opinions at issue were among the most ridiculous we’ve ever seen – directly contrary to the controlling FDA regulations applicable to the particular drug. Rather, expert testimony couched as legal conclusion merely tells the jury which result to reach.
at 287 (citing transcript of expert’s testimony). [A]t A]t first blush, [the expert’s] testimony. No other witness offered testimony on these unidentified standards. An excellent example is the Sherman case, which involved junk science causation testimony in what we call a “toxic soup” chemical exposure case.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 15,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content