Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Business Crimes Hotline
AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, a major pharmaceuticals manufacturer headquartered in Wilmington, DE, pleaded guilty in Wilmington's federal district court to conspiring to violate the Prescription Drug Marketing Act (PDMA). The company agreed to pay $355 million to resolve criminal charges and civil liabilities in connection with pricing and marketing practices regarding Zoladex, a drug sold by AstraZeneca and used primarily for the treatment of prostate cancer. AstraZeneca also agreed to comply with the terms of a corporate integrity agreement that ensures, among other things, that the company will report to the Medicare and Medicaid programs the average sale price for drugs reimbursed by those programs.
From January 1991 through December 31, 2002, employees of AstraZeneca allegedly provided thousands of free samples of Zoladex to physicians, knowing and expecting that certain of them would prescribe and administer the free samples to their patients and then bill the patients, Medicare, Medicaid, or other federally funded insurance programs for those samples. During that same period, AstraZeneca allegedly offered and paid illegal remuneration in various forms such as free Zoladex, unrestricted grants, business assistance grants and services, travel and entertainment, consulting services, and honoraria.
The investigation into AstraZeneca commenced after the filing of a civil False Claim Act suit by Douglas Durand, who was employed as the Vice President of Sales for TAP Pharmaceutical Products, Inc., the manufacturer of the prostate cancer drug Lupron. In October 2001, TAP agreed to pay $875 million to resolve civil and criminal liabilities in connection with its pricing and marketing of Lupron.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at customercare@alm.com or 877-256-2473
Spurred By Data Breaches, CLOs Are Increasing Cybersecurity Leadership Role
Chief information officers still bear the brunt of cybersecurity worries at many companies. But a study by the Association of Corporate Counsel Foundation finds that chief legal officers are increasingly taking a leadership role in cybersecurity strategy.
GCs Want to Tap Into AI But Lack Roadmap, Report Shows
General counsel are eager to tap the promise of generative AI. But without clear technology road maps, many legal departments are struggling to turn that interest into action.
Is Google Search Dead? The Key to Thriving In an AI-Driven World
Part Two of this two-part articleexamines practical steps marketers must take to succeed in this changing landscape by embracing a multichannel, AI-driven approach to their marketing and PR efforts. This means rethinking your strategy to build direct connections with your audience, using platforms that elevate your visibility and focusing on storytelling that resonates.
Shifting Crypto and Cyber Enforcement Priorities In SEC
When the SEC issues the next annual enforcement report for fiscal year 2025, we expect securities offering actions and investment adviser actions will almost certainly be up, and the “crypto” and “cyber” cases will almost certainly be down. Public statements by the new SEC administration have said as much, but even more telling than public statements are the allocation of limited enforcement resources.
Seventh, Ninth Court Rulings Tighten Reach of Federal Video Privacy Protection Act
The VPPA may be nearly four-decades old and video-rental stores largely a thing of the past, but the rise of online content, streaming services and ancillary activities has brought with it frequent litigation based on the VPPA. The key challenge in these litigations is how to interpret the VPPA’s 1980s terms in light of today’s digital advances.