Drug & Device Law

FEBRUARY 9, 2022

Mayo Clinic , 2022 Fla. 27, 2022), and its reasoning is crystalline and straightforward. Against the authority of the Mayo Clinic and other reputable sources, the plaintiffs relied on the testimony of a single doctor. The doctor testifying for the plaintiffs was licensed in Florida, but with no board certifications.

Doctors 64

Doctors Hospitals Testimonials Treatment 64

Drug & Device Law

DECEMBER 29, 2023

2023) (remote trial testimony cannot be compelled beyond Rule 45’s 100-mile limit on subpoenas) ( here ); Carson v. They excluded bogus expert testimony under Fed. As a matter of science, the purported link was imaginary, as discussed at great length in one of the many excellent Zantac ( 2022+4 ) MDL opinions. Bonta , 85 F.4th

Testimonials 105

Testimonials FDA Drugs Vaccine 105

Drug & Device Law

MAY 30, 2022

The law presumes that licensed doctors know what they are doing. Somatics, LLC , 2022 WL 989469 (9th Cir. April 1, 2022) (the companion case to this ). The prescriber’s] testimony, however, does not establish that he would have altered his prescribing conduct. These propositions were employed recently in Himes v.

Testimonials 59

Testimonials Doctors Production Laboratories 59

Drug & Device Law

MARCH 9, 2022

Texas March 2, 2022)— is a veritable mixed bag. The issue in Robinson was the admissibility of testimony by the plaintiff’s regulatory expert. So much for judicial gate-keeping, Inadequate Warnings to Doctors. How does such testimony meet the relevance requirement of Fed. The “mesh case of the week” — Robinson v.

Testimonials 64

Testimonials FDA Doctors Regulations 64

Drug & Device Law

JUNE 1, 2022

We’ve been writing for a while about cases rejecting someone’s insistence that a doctor prescribe ivermectin for Covid-19, even when that doctor (or hospital) thinks such use of ivermectin is not appropriate medical care – is, in fact, horsebleep. ?. Aurora Healthcare , 2022 WL 1657559 (Wisc. The appellate court was unimpressed.

Doctors 124

Doctors Hospitals Treatment Testimonials 124

Drug & Device Law

JUNE 13, 2022

That requirement comes with an exception: Provided, however , That such information may be omitted from the dispensing package if, but only if, the article is a device for which directions, hazards, warnings, and other information are commonly known to practitioners licensed by law to use the device. 2022 WL 970681 (N.D. Bard, Inc. ,

Testimonials 59

Testimonials Licensing Licensing FDA 59