Pink Sheet is part of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction
UsernamePublicRestriction

Ruling to FDA in Nutraceutical case

This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet

Executive Summary

U.S. District Judge for the district of Utah, Paul G. Cassell finds FDA's rulemaking banning ephedra dietary supplements was "procedurally and substantially proper" on March 16. However, Jonathan W. Emord of Emord & Associates says in an e-mail "one critical point" in the decision "cuts against the FDA": Cassell found FDA "explicitly limited its rulemaking and the reach of its final rule" to ephedra supplements. Thus, even if this decision stands it ensures the Final Rule "is not precedent for the creation of a supplement-wide risk-benefit adulteration standard," Emord says. Nutraceutical had sought summary judgment that the agency acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner and violated administrative procedure law in issuing the 2004 ban of ephedrine-alkaloid dietary supplements (1"The Tan Sheet" Feb. 19, 2007, p. 13). Emord says the law firm will file a notice of appeal to the Tenth Circuit on March 19...

You may also be interested in...



New Supplement Rule Was Not Previewed in Ephedra Proposal – Nutraceutical

FDA's 1997 proposed rule on ephedra did not foreshadow the agency applying a new adulteration standard to all dietary supplements; this renders the 2004 ban a violation of the Administrative Procedures Act, Nutraceutical Corp. argues in the latest filing in its suit against the agency

Sandoz Pioneers Posaconazole And Silodosin In Canada

Sandoz Canada has become the first manufacturer to launch generic versions of posaconazole and silodosin in Canada. The company launched the generic version of Allergan’s Rapaflo (silodosin) after a Canadian court ruled that Sandoz did not infringe a key formulation patent.

Amarin Pulls Insurer Into Hikma/Vascepa Induced Infringement Suit

US healthcare insurance provider Health Net failed to respect Amarin’s patent rights in the way it distributed Hikma’s generic version of Vascepa (icosapent ethyl), the originator contends in an expanded induced infringement suit.

Topics

UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

LL1135544

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel