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

Athena Appeal Decision Could Open ‘Floodgate’ For False Claims Litigation

This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet

Executive Summary

Lower court decisions that Athena Cosmetics’ RevitaLash products is an unapproved drug competing unfairly against Allergan's Latisse drug could have broader implications if the Supreme Court denies the firm's request for review. Already beleaguered by class actions following FDA warnings, firms could face more opportunistic lawsuits if federal courts are left to determine a product's intended use and regulatory status.

You may also be interested in...



Industry Roundup: Nicotine Exposure ANPR, Athena Petition Denied

Comments sought for nicotine-exposure ANPR; Supreme Court denies Athena petition; Neuragen U.S. market rights; Prestige ‘TMI’ about Monistat; and more news in brief.

Industry Roundup: Nicotine Exposure ANPR, Athena Petition Denied

Comments sought for nicotine-exposure ANPR; Supreme Court denies Athena petition; Neuragen U.S. market rights; Prestige ‘TMI’ about Monistat; and more news in brief.

Supreme Court Review Of Athena Cosmetics Case, Federal Preemption Argument Unlikely

Federal food and drug law does not impliedly preempt Allergan's suit against Athena Cosmetics alleging that the defendant's RevitaLash products compete unfairly against the drug firm's Latisse treatment in California, according to a brief filed by Solicitor General Donald Verrilli with the Supreme Court. Athena has argued that the absence of FDA action against its eyelash enhancers signals that their cosmetic positioning is lawful, but Verrilli disagrees, maintaining that such litigation can supplement rather than conflict with FDA regulation.

Related Content

Topics

Related Companies

UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

PS107745

Ask The Analyst

Please Note: You can also Click below Link for Ask the Analyst
Ask The Analyst

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