Photo of Bexis

We’ve decided that, since PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing, 564 U.S. 604 (2011), product liability preemption in the context of generic drugs has come into its own and should no longer be lumped in with the overall topic of drug/vaccine preemption.  Thus we’re bestowing a new scorecard on post-Mensing generic drug preemption decisions. We’ll

Regular blog readers know how we feel about Conte v. Wyeth, Inc., 85 Cal. Rptr.3d 299 (Cal. App. 2008), review denied (Cal. Jan. 21, 2009) – the case that held an innovator drug manufacturer potentially liable for “misrepresentations” even though it did not manufacture the drug that allegedly harmed the plaintiff. We criticized virtually

Sharp-eyed readers of our blog (those who really need to get a life) will notice something different today. For the rest of you … well, we’ll tell you. Over on the right-hand margin, in our Archives section, just below our Index of Posts, there are two more links, one to “Drug Preemption Scorecard

It was probably inevitable, but our drug preemption scorecard has prompted some folks who must be gluttons for punishment to request a similar rundown of how medical device preemption has been faring lately. Since we’re always looking for things to blog about (and because of the identity of some of the people asking us) we’re

Don’t be deceived by the date of this post! We update this scorecard regularly!
Folks keep asking us for the drug preemption scorecard: Since the FDA promulgated its “Preemption Preamble” in January 2006, how many decisions have accepted the preemption defense, and how many have courts rejected it?
It’s not quite that easy. There are