We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-2 of 2

Generic drug manufacturers and failure to warn: what duty is there after Pliva v. Mensing?

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 27 2011

The Supreme Court ruled on June 23, 2011, that generic drug manufacturers cannot be sued for a failure to warn under state tort law, as long as their labeling complies with the FDA mandated labeling for the innovator drug product

A Matrixx Revolution, Part II: Supreme Court affirms Ninth Circuit's holding that life science companies cannot rely on a statistical significance standard when deciding whether adverse event reports are material for the purpose of securities disclosures

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 29 2011

On March 22, the US Supreme Court affirmed the Ninth Circuit's ruling in Matrixx Initiatives, Inc v Siracusano, 09-1156