We confess: we spend much too much time on a prominent social media platform. We post way too many pictures of the Drug and Device Little Rescue Dogs. We follow the progress of our impending addition, a Standard Poodle show puppy, currently in utero. We engage in pointless, angry, political debate. And we look at
We are on a DRI panel this September in Nashville discussing challenges to expert testimony, so we are especially vigilant when it comes to new cases on this subject. The rulings on expert admissibility in United States v. Biogen Idec., Inc., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120549 (D. Mass. July 8, 2022), are not especially
Perhaps not as menacing as Lions and Tigers and Bears (Oh my) – but feasible, adequate, and effective proved to be too much for plaintiff in Davis v. Johnson & Johnson, 2022 WL 2115075 (Jun. 9, 2022).
It is a remanded pelvic mesh case. On defendant’s motion to exclude certain testimony by plaintiff’s expert, most
On this gorgeous late-spring Philadelphia day, we are excited about a couple of things. The Drug and Device Law Dowager Countess is home, after an improbable recovery from a horrific fall. We just learned that the Colorado Symphony is resurrecting an (also improbably) cool tribute to John Denver we saw a few years ago, featuring
A very helpful to-be-published opinion from the California Court of Appeal caught our eye this week because it comes out the correct way on an issue that has always bothered us: Does a defendant (not the plaintiff) in a product defect case have to offer evidence on medical causation to a reasonable degree of medical
When we were small – ten or so – our father worked twenty miles from our home, in the town in which we now live. The town was – and is – a few miles from the Devon Horse Show, a world-famous affair held for eleven days each spring spanning Memorial Day Weekend. For one
We write on a chilly day in Philadelphia – we and the Drug and Device Law Little Rescue Dogs all shivered on our morning walk. And we are excited to share the news that our scruffy shelter rescues will be joined, a la Lady and the Tramp, by some relative aristocracy later this year: our
Not too long ago we researched precedent that forbade persons claiming to be “FDA experts” from opining that products are “adulterated” or “misbranded.” In that post, we mentioned that this research is a subset of a “general” precedent “precluding expert opinions on questions of law,” which we didn’t get into because Bexis’ book addressed it.
The Incretin-Based Therapies MDL has followed a long and winding road, and it all should come to an end with a recent Ninth Circuit opinion affirming the exclusion of the plaintiffs’ only general causation expert. It all started in 2013 with the MDL transfer of cases involving multiple diabetes drugs to the Southern District of
The pelvic mesh remand hits just keep coming. We like Shostrom v. Ethicon, Inc., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55748 (D. Colorado March 28, 2022), because it hammers some ubiquitous plaintiff mesh experts and because it finds a way to depart from an awful MDL ruling. The fact that the opinion comes at the expense