HEALTH & LIFE SCIENCES NEWS

This Week in 340B: June 17 – 23, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Reuben Bank, Matthew David, Margaret Houtz, Deepika Raj and Kelsey Reinhardt | Jun 25, 2025 | 340B

Find this week’s updates on 340B litigation to help you stay in the know on how 340B cases are developing across the country. Each week we comb through the dockets of more than 50 340B cases to provide you with a quick summary of relevant updates from the prior week in this industry-shaping body of litigation. Get more details on these 340B cases and all other material 340B cases pending in federal and state courts with the 340B Litigation Tracker.

Issues at Stake: Contract Pharmacy; Rebate Model; HRSA Audit Process

In five cases challenging Tennessee, Hawaii and Utah state laws governing contract pharmacy arrangements:
- Tennessee: In one case, amici filed an amicus curiae brief in opposition to plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction and in a second case, the plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary injunctive relief and the defendant filed a motion to dismiss.
- Hawaii: In one case, the plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary injunction.
- Utah: In three cases, the plaintiffs filed oppositions to the defendants’ motion to dismiss and replies in support of plaintiffs’ motions for preliminary injunctive relief.
In two appealed cases against the government related to rebate models, the court granted appellant’s motion to consolidate the cases with other similarly situated cases, and consolidated two additional cases as cross-appeals.
In three appealed cases against the government related to rebate models, the appellants filed opening briefs.
In two cases related to the HRSA audit process, the court granted defendants’ motion [...]

Continue Reading

This Week in 340B: June 10 – 16, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Reuben Bank, Matthew David, Margaret Houtz, Deepika Raj, Kelsey Reinhardt and Nadine Tejadilla | Jun 18, 2025 | 340B

Find this week’s updates on 340B litigation to help you stay in the know on how 340B cases are developing across the country. Each week we comb through the dockets of more than 50 340B cases to provide you with a quick summary of relevant updates from the prior week in this industry-shaping body of litigation. Get more details on these 340B cases and all other material 340B cases pending in federal and state courts with the 340B Litigation Tracker.

Issues at Stake: Contract Pharmacy; Rebate Model; HRSA Audit Process; Anti-Trust

A drug manufacturer filed a complaint challenging a Colorado state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements.
In two cases against the government related to rebate models, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal and in one of those cases intervenors filed a notice of cross appeal.
In two cases against the government related to rebate models, the court granted the plaintiffs’ motion to consolidate.
In a case by a covered entity challenging the government’s decision to allow a manufacturer’s audit, the covered entity filed a memorandum in opposition to the government’s motion to dismiss.
In a case challenging a South Dakota state bill, defendants filed a reply brief in support of their motion to dismiss.
In an antitrust class action case, the plaintiff filed a memorandum in opposition to the defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s amended complaint.

This Week in 340B: June 3 – 9, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Jae Hyun Lee, Reuben Bank, Matthew David and Kelsey Reinhardt | Jun 11, 2025 | 340B

Find this week’s updates on 340B litigation to help you stay in the know on how 340B cases are developing across the country. Each week we comb through the dockets of more than 50 340B cases to provide you with a quick summary of relevant updates from the prior week in this industry-shaping body of litigation. Get more details on these 340B cases and all other material 340B cases pending in federal and state courts with the 340B Litigation Tracker.

Issues at Stake: Rebate Model; Contract Pharmacy; HRSA Audit Process; Other

In one case against the government related to rebate models, the intervenor defendants filed their reply.
In one case against the government related to rebate models, the plaintiff filed an emergency motion to consolidate and expedite.
In one contract pharmacy case, amici filed an amicus curiae brief in support of defendants’ motion to dismiss.
In a case by a covered entity challenging the government’s decision to allow a manufacturer’s audit, the drug manufacturer filed a motion for leave to file an amicus brief.
In four cases challenging state laws in Tennessee and Utah governing contract pharmacy arrangements:
- Tennessee: A group of amici filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the defendant’s opposition to plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction.
- Utah: The plaintiff in one case filed a motion for preliminary injunction and in two other cases, two separate groups of amici filed amicus curiae briefs.
A 340B covered entity filed two separate [...]

Continue Reading

This Week in 340B: May 27 – June 2, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Matthew David, Jae Hyun Lee, Kelsey Reinhardt and Nadine Tejadilla | Jun 4, 2025 | 340B

Find this week’s updates on 340B litigation to help you stay in the know on how 340B cases are developing across the country. Each week we comb through the dockets of more than 50 340B cases to provide you with a quick summary of relevant updates from the prior week in this industry-shaping body of litigation. Get more details on these 340B cases and all other material 340B cases pending in federal and state courts with the 340B Litigation Tracker.

Issues at Stake: Other; Contract Pharmacy; HRSA Audit Process; GPO Prohibition

In a case against the Health Resources and Services Administration’s (HRSA) challenging its certification of a group of entities as 340B-eligible, the government filed a reply in support of its partial motion to dismiss.
In a case by a covered entity challenging the government’s decision to allow a manufacturer’s audit, the government filed a motion to dismiss.
In a case by a covered entity against the government, the court granted the covered entity motion for leave to file a response to the intervenors’ amicus brief.
A drug manufacturer filed a complaint challenging a Hawaii state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements.
In a case challenging HRSA’s policy limiting the circumstances in which covered entities can use their group purchasing arrangements to purchase non-340B drugs, the plaintiff filed a combined reply in support of its motion for summary judgment and opposition to defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment.
In three cases challenging state laws in Tennessee, [...]

Continue Reading

This Week in 340B: May 20 – 26, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Matthew David, Margaret Houtz, Jae Hyun Lee, Deepika Raj and Kelsey Reinhardt | May 28, 2025 | 340B

Find this week’s updates on 340B litigation to help you stay in the know on how 340B cases are developing across the country. Each week we comb through the dockets of more than 50 340B cases to provide you with a quick summary of relevant updates from the prior week in this industry-shaping body of litigation. Get more details on these 340B cases and all other material 340B cases pending in federal and state courts with the 340B Litigation Tracker.

Issues at Stake: Contract Pharmacy; Other; Rebate Model

In four cases challenging Utah state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, amici filed a motion for leave to file an amicus brief.
In one case challenging Nebraska state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiffs filed an opposition to an amicus curiae brief and an opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss.
A trade association of drug manufacturers filed a complaint challenging a Tennessee state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements.
A drug manufacturer filed a complaint challenging a Utah state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements.
In an appealed case challenging a Louisiana law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the court denied the intervenor-defendant’s motion for leave to file a sur-reply to appellant’s reply brief.
In a case by a covered entity against the government, the covered entity filed a motion for leave to file a response to the intervenors’ amicus brief.
In two cases against the government related to rebate models, the plaintiff filed an appeal [...]

Continue Reading