Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A recent Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Warning Letter suggests that the agency will not hesitate, when necessary, to exercise its power to enforce post-marketing requirements (PMRs) for approved drug products. (The Warning Letter is available at www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2012/ucm293490.htm. While the Warning Letter is available publicly, we will not disclose here the company that received the correspondence.) The Warning Letter states that the recipient company failed to submit a required study protocol and final study report, pursuant to the company's PMRs and, therefore, the drug products are misbranded under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) (21 U.S.C. ' 352(z)). The Warning Letter is significant, because it demonstrates that the agency will take enforcement action against a company for failure to comply with PMRs, creating yet another area of enforcement that can lead to cascading effects, such as increased product liability exposure, for the recipient company.
Drawing FDA reproach for failure to comply with the FDCA is bad enough, but, due to their public availability, FDA enforcement letters also increase a company's potential liability exposure. The FDA posts such enforcement letters on its website, which means that anyone, including would-be plaintiffs and their attorneys, may use the findings in the letter to bolster potential product liability claims against the recipient company. In light of the FDA's apparent readiness to issue such letters, companies should take extra care to comply with PMRs and other FDA requirements, both to enhance regulatory compliance and to reduce liability risk.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.