Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Drug & Device News
Company Pays Heavy Penalty for Selling Adulterated Surgical Device
OtisMed Corp., maker of the OtisKnee guide, a device used by surgeons to make accurate cuts during knee surgeries, has pleaded guilty to selling unapproved medical devices. OtisMed, a Stryker subsidiary, and its former CEO entered their guilty pleas on Dec. 8, 2014. The company ageed at the same time to pay civil financial penalties that, along with the criminal fines levied against it, amount to more than $80 million. OtisMed also agreed it should be prevented from taking part in all federal programs for 20 years. Stryker will not be prosecuted, according to the parties' agreement, as long as OtisMed fulfills its obligations under the terms of the settlement within 90 days of sentencing.
The OtisKnee guide entered the market in 2006. Its maker sought marketing clearance from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2008, but that clearance was denied in 2009. A week later, the company shipped out more than 200 of the guides, thus introducing “adulterated medical devices” into interstate commerce, according to the government. Stryker did not acquire OtisMed until two months after the adulterated product shipments; according to the U.S. Attorney's Office, the parent company was unaware of OtisMed Corp.'s infractions until after it acquired the subsidiary.
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 [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?