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
What We Expect the FDA to do in October 2023 In this ongoing feature, AgencyIQ looks at public data to determine what the FDA is likely to do in the month ahead, including key deadlines, meetings, events, planned regulations, comment periods and more. The final rule will amend the administrative destruction provisions in 21 CFR 1.94
FDA’s is generally consistent from edition to edition , will each edition consisting primarily of holdovers from previous editions. The latest Fall 2022 Unified Agenda contains 51 regulations that FDA plans to publish related to human medical product regulation. Read our analysis of that rule here and here. ]
What We Expect the FDA to do in November 2023 In this ongoing feature, AgencyIQ looks at public data to determine what the FDA is likely to do in the month ahead, including key deadlines, meetings, events, planned regulations, comment periods and more. November is packed with regulatory and industry meetings. to include devices.
What We Expect the FDA to do in December 2023 In this ongoing feature, AgencyIQ looks at public data to determine what the FDA is likely to do in the month ahead, including key deadlines, meetings, events, planned regulations, comment periods and more. The December calendar is packed with regulatory and industry meetings.
Congress created an FDAapproval process that is both rigorous and thorough, and pharmaceutical companies invest billions of dollars in research and development to meet FDA’s scientific standards. 19, 2021) (admitting and excluding Studnicki testimony); Whole Woman’s Health Alliance v. Longbons T., Harrison D.J.,
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
There’s no science to back any of the allegations up – as demonstrated by the masterful (and even longer) take down of nearly identical substantive allegations in the Zantac ( 2022+4 ) MDL. The FDA, for one, advised patients to keep using these drugs. Valsartan , by contrast, responds with platitudes and 50,000 foot generalizations.
2022) (many other cases recognize this problem with class actions). This time-tested type of evidence is mostly absent from the analysis in PATDC82 II – as in Neurontin , the only actual prescriber testimony belied plaintiffs’ position. E.g. , Laudato v. EQT Corp. , 4th 256, 260 (3d Cir. How could this happen?
But in prescription medical product liability litigation, products must receive FDAapproval, clearance or other authorization (hereafter, collectively referred to as “approval” for short) before they can be marketed. to determine whether a proposed alternative drug would have received FDAapproval.” at 237-38.
Pizzitola I , 2022 U.S. Plaintiff argued the testimony was relevant to a risk/utility analysis but showing that a different medical procedure may be safer, “does not affect whether a product has utility and/or risks.” As long as they don’t, the door to this testimony remains closed. . Pizzitola II , 2022 U.S.
16, 2022) (“ Mixson I ”), and Mixson v. 2022 WL 7581737 (N.D. 23, 2022) (“ Mixson II ”), by no means won everything, but what they won was more important than what they didn’t, so we’re OK with the results. 2022 WL 4364153, at *2. 2022 WL 4364153, at *2. Mixson I , 2022 WL 4364153, at *5. Bard, Inc. ,
2022 WL 1016686 (Wis. April 5, 2022) (per curiam). 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. Rennick , 2022 WL 1016686, at *4 (no citations omitted). 2022 WL 1016686, at *4. See Rennick v.
2022 WL 326781 (D. 3, 2022), the plaintiff alleged that he was injured when the defendants’ modular hip implant fractured seven years after it was implanted in him. Vollrath , 2022 WL 326781 at *3-4. their testimony does not present a genuine issue of medical fact.” In Vollrath v. Depuy Synthes Business Entities, et al.,
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