Remove Doctors Remove Pharmacy Remove Testimonials Remove Treatment
article thumbnail

Article FDA Thank You In unanimous decision, Supreme Court solves FDA’s ‘standing’ issue

Agency IQ

In unanimous decision, Supreme Court solves FDA’s ‘standing’ issue Two lower courts had articulated a Rube Goldberg-esque theory of “standing” – the right of a person or organization to sue another entity – based on the idea that doctors not prescribing mifepristone or treating patients who had taken it had experienced economic harms.

FDA 40
article thumbnail

Another RICOdiculous Decision

Drug & Device Law

Yet what the plaintiffs were claiming is that, despite Actos’ undisputed effectiveness as a diabetes treatment, no TPP in the country would have purchased it for that purpose because of the 3/10,000 bladder cancer increased risk. the relationship between [plaintiff] and its pharmacy benefit manager. . . PATDC82 I , 943 F.3d 3d at 1251.

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. They excluded bogus expert testimony under Fed. Further, “adequacy” is an objective standard, that neither a plaintiff’s self-interested testimony nor equivocal health care provider testimony can touch.