Late last year, we discussed the dismissal of three purported California no-injury class actions alleging that certain over the counter (“OTC”) acne| Drug & Device Law
When a federal agency reverses course, the Supreme Court has a test to determine whether that agency action is impermissibly “arbitrary and| Drug & Device Law
In an earlier post, we discussed how the FDA, for over twenty years, from mid-1997 through mid-2019, created and operated an “alternative summary| Drug & Device Law
Bexis has been updating the preemption chapter of his treatise on drug/device product liability litigation. He came across several preemption| Drug & Device Law
Every now and then, the Reed Smith powers that be make seats in the firm’s skybox at the Phillies’ (first place – who woulda thunk?) stadium available to| Drug & Device Law
As we blogged at the time, we believe that the Ninth Circuit made a historic error in Stengel v. Medtronic Inc., 704 F.3d 1224 (9th Cir., 2013) (en banc),| Drug & Device Law
The plaintiff in Kane v. Covidien LP, 2025 U.S. Dist. Lexis 25718 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 12, 2025), lost the bulk of her case recently, on a motion to dismiss no| Drug & Device Law
In 2018, our blogpost on In re Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Products Marketing, Sales Practices & Liability Litigation, 903 F.3d 278 (3d Cir.| Drug & Device Law
Researchers at Temple University here in Philly recently published a scientific article, “Learning Impairments, Memory Deficits, and Neuropathology in| Drug & Device Law
In addition to its recent revamp of its “§510(k)” substantial equivalence clearance process for medical devices, (see our post here), the FDA has also| Drug & Device Law
