Photo of Michelle Yeary

If you’re a frequent visitor to the DDL blog, you’ll know all about products liability claims premised on defendants’ alleged failure to report adverse events to the FDA.  You’ll also be acutely aware of what we think of such claims—they are flat-out preempted. Much to our dismay, not every court agrees with us. But recently

Photo of Steven Boranian

A federal judge in California filed an important OTC preemption decision earlier this month, and it’s important because it applied federal preemption to shut down (for now) one of the many recent benzene-related consumer class actions.  The case is Daugherty v. Padagis US LLC, No. 24-cv-02066, 2025 WL 2243622 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 6, 2025)

Photo of Steven Boranian

We don’t venture into politics here at the DDL Blog, but sometimes we have to call them like we see them.  A divided panel of the Fourth Circuit filed an opinion last week upholding a state law that essentially prohibits the sale and use of an FDA-approved drug within that state for its FDA-approved intended

Photo of Eric Alexander

This is from the non-Dechert and non-RS portion of the Blog.

We used to post about defense wins in litigation over both branded and generic ranitidine fairly often.  The MDL in the Southern District of Florida systematically knocked down all of plaintiffs’ theories based on the lack of legal support (e.g., preemption) and lack of