1. Pink Sheet
  2. >>Legal & IP

Product Liability: Discussions With FDA Remain Key In Defeating State Tort Suits

 
• By Brenda Sandburg

US Supreme Court says judges, not juries, should decide if FDA would have rejected additional label warning; Merck appears to have the support of three justices who note FDA's position that it decided not to require a change to Fosamax labeling.

US Supreme Court building with 2nd statue on right

The US Supreme Court unanimously ruled that it is up to judges rather than juries to decide whether FDA rejected a drug manufacturer's request to add a warning to its labeling. The court also held that a company must provide "clear evidence" that it fully informed FDA of the reasons for the proposed label change and that the agency told the company it would not approve the change.

In its 20 May ruling in Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht, the court remanded the question of whether state law claims that Merck & Co. Inc

Read the full article – start your free trial today!

Join thousands of industry professionals who rely on Pink Sheet for daily insights

  • Start your 7-day free trial
  • Explore trusted news, analysis, and insights
  • Access comprehensive global coverage
  • Enjoy instant access – no credit card required
Start Free Trial

Already a subscriber?

More from Legal & IP

Life After Loper: Vaping Case Shows US FDA Retains Considerable Deference

 
• By Craig Bleifer, Royce DuBiner, Max Bogost, Michael Brody, and Allyson Maur

A US Supreme Court ruling in favor of the agency in an e-cigarette case has implications for drugs and other medical products as the justices decided not to disturb the FDA’s ‘change in position’ authority, while also creating a complex new landscape.

HHS Secretary Kennedy Says Trump Will Make Final Decision On Mifepristone Policy

 
• By Derrick Gingery

With an FDA review ongoing, Kennedy’s admission, made during a Senate hearing on the Health and Human Services Department’s budget request, suggests political officials could supersede scientific decisions.

Medicare Negotiation Does Not Violate Due Process, Appeals Court Rules, Other Suits At Risk

 
• By Cathy Kelly

Decision in AstraZeneca’s lawsuit against the Health and Human Services Department is a precedent-setting victory for the government and a blow to manufacturer efforts to block the price negotiation program.

UK Health Data Research Service Looks ‘Encouraging’ For Industry, But Implementation Details Will Be Key

 
• By Anabel Costa-Ferreira

Marcus Vass and Vladimir Murovec of international law firm Osborne Clarke tell the Pink Sheet what the government's planned HDRS might mean for industry, and how it compares with the European Health Data Space.

More from Pink Sheet

Novavax’s COVID-19 Vaccine Label Narrowed After Political Officials Intervened

 
• By Sarah Karlin-Smith

The label that Novavax's COVID-19 vaccine was slated to receive before political officials held up the approval was broader than was granted 16 May.

Biomarker Negativity At Issue In Pfizer Bid To Broaden Talzenna CRPC Claim

 
• By Bridget Silverman

The FDA questioned Pfizer’s reliance on a “large, incompletely defined” subgroup of castration-resistant prostate cancer patients without known HRR gene alterations in its review of the proposed expansion of Talzenna’s first-line indication for HRR-mutated CRPC to an all-comers population.

UroGen’s Mitomycin: Are Randomized Trials For Bladder Cancer Necessary?

 
• By Sue Sutter

The Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee will vote on the risk-benefit of UGN-102 for low-grade, intermediate-risk, non-muscle invasive bladder cancer based on data from a single-arm trial, but the FDA also seeks input on requiring randomized studies for future treatments.