Children's Motrin Label Ruling Shows 'Genuine Confusion' On Pre-emption – J&J
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
J&J's attorneys argue that a state court ruling of inadequate warnings on Children's Motrin labels conflicts with a federal appellate court's ruling about the product that also swung on whether a manufacturer can be held liable for failing to include a label warning without “clear evidence” FDA would have approved the label.
You may also be interested in...
Johnson & Johnson files a writ of certiorari asking the Supreme Court to review a $140m judgment against the firm in Massachusetts. Questions over “clear evidence” needed for FDA decision to pre-empt state courts are at heart of issue and need the court’s consideration.
The Supreme Court's ruling in Wyeth v. Levine dashes pharmaceutical industry hopes for broad protection from state product liability lawsuits, but is not expected to trigger a sea-change in current industry operations
Two months after submitting CBD enforcement draft guidance for OMB review, FDA published separate draft guidance on studies for bioequivalents of an approved cannabidiol-based drug. But the draft guidance that the supplement industry awaits in pitched anticipation remains under review.