Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court held that federal law prohibits generic pharmaceutical manufacturers from independently changing the labeling of their drugs ' the labeling must be the same as the labeling for the brand-name drug to which the generic is equivalent. PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing, 131 S. Ct. 2567, 2574-77 (2011). State-law claims based on the failure to provide different warnings for generic drugs conflict with this “federal duty of 'sameness'” and are therefore preempted. Id. at 2575.
Although attempts to avoid Mensing have been largely unsuccessful, in Bartlett v. Mutual Pharm. Co., the First Circuit held that a design-defect claim against a generic manufacturer was not preempted under Mensing because it could simply “choose not to make the drug at all.” 678 F.3d 30, 37 (1st Cir. 2012). In June, the Supreme Court reversed, holding that “state-law design-defect claims ' that place a duty on [generic] manufacturers to render a drug safer by either altering its composition or altering its labeling are in conflict with federal laws that prohibit manufacturers from unilaterally altering drug composition or labeling.” Mutual Pharm. Co. v. Bartlett, 133 S. Ct. 2466, 2479 (2013).
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
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
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.
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.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.