Earlier in the week we got tagged by Amlaw for one of our posts about how boilerplate design and manufacturing defect claims recently got dismissed under Twombly/Iqbal.
That’s cool. Amlaw drives a lot of traffic to little blogs like ours when it says “you’re it.”
But we were a little surprised by
This article in today’s Washington Post, by Jeff Rosen and Jay Lefkowitz, says that President Obama’s May 20 memorandum on preemption “relied on a rationale that makes no sense and is not required by law.”
(Hat tip to Point of Law.)
C’mon, guys. We publish this blog for a reason. Pay attention.
We’ve explained over and over again that plaintiffs often cannot pursue alleged violations of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act under the rubric of negligence per se where “the legislature does not intend for a statute to be privately enforced.”
In Pantages
A tip of the cyberhat to Ed Gerecke, Penelope Dixon, and Dave Walz and of Carlton Fields for passing along news of another preemption win, in Wolicki-Gables v. Arrow International, Inc., ___ F. Supp. 2d ___, 2009 WL 2190069, slip op. (M.D. Fla. July 22, 2009). That’s a quick decision to publish by
We love Iqbal:
“sitaaro.n se aage jahaa.N aur bhii hai.n
abhii ishq ke imtihaa.N aur bhii hai.n“
That is, of course, from Sir Muhammed Iqbal‘s classic poem, “Ahead of the Stars.”
(If only we spoke Urdu, we’d probably appreciate it a little more.)
(We told you this blogging was good