HEALTH & LIFE SCIENCES NEWS

This Week in 340B: July 29 – August 4, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Reuben Bank, Matthew David, Margaret Houtz, Jae Hyun Lee, Deepika Raj and Nadine Tejadilla | Aug 6, 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

In five appealed cases related to rebate models, the defendant-appellees filed their briefs.
In a case against the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) challenging its certification of a group of entities as 340B-eligible, the court denied the government’s partial motion to dismiss.
In a case challenging a Nebraska state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a brief opposing defendant’s motion to dismiss.
In a case challenging a Hawaii state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a preliminary injunction.
Three drug manufacturers and one trade association of drug manufacturers each filed four separate complaints to challenge state laws governing contract pharmacy arrangements in Oregon, Nebraska, and North Dakota.

This Week in 340B: July 22 – 28, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Margaret Houtz and Kelsey Reinhardt | Jul 30, 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

In four cases challenging Oklahoma, Colorado, and Tennessee state laws governing contract pharmacy arrangements:
- Oklahoma: In two cases, defendant filed its answer and in one of those cases, plaintiff also filed a motion for preliminary injunction.
- Colorado: In one case, plaintiff filed its reply in support of its motion for preliminary injunction.
- Tennessee: In one case, the plaintiff filed a reply in support of its motion for preliminary injunction, and the defendant filed a reply in support of its motion to dismiss.

This Week in 340B: July 15 – 21, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Matthew David, Jae Hyun Lee, Deepika Raj and Kelsey Reinhardt | Jul 23, 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; Other

In two cases challenging a Nebraska state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, amici filed briefs requesting the court grant defendant’s motion to dismiss.
In a case challenging a Colorado state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, amici filed a brief in opposition to plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
In three appealed cases related to rebate models:
- In two cases, the court granted the plaintiff-appellant drug manufacturers’ motion to dismiss the cross-appeals.
- In one case, the court granted the plaintiff-appellant drug manufacturer’s motion to consolidate.
In a case by a covered entity against the government, the government filed an answer to the covered entity’s complaint.

CMS CY 2026 proposed rules: 340B in PFS and OPPS

by Emily Jane Cook | Jul 23, 2025 | 340B

On July 15, 2025, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released the CY 2026 Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS) proposed rule. The proposed rule includes a provision that would increase the reduction in OPPS payment rates to offset the lump sum payments previously paid to 340B hospitals from 0.5% to 2% and would accelerate the period of the reductions from 16 years to six years. This payment reduction would apply to most items and services and most hospitals paid under OPPS. The reduction is not limited to 340B hospitals. CMS also proposes to reduce payments under OPPS for drug administration at most off-campus hospital outpatient departments not already subject to site-neutral payments to the rate paid under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS), representing an approximately 65% reduction in payments.

CMS is accepting comments on this proposal through September 13, 2025.

The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on July 17, 2025 and is available here. Refer to pp. 33631-35 for information about the OPPS payment reduction to account for the 340B budget neutrality adjustment, pp. 33685-93 for information about the application of site neutral payments to hospital outpatient drug administration services and pp. 33653-54 and pp. 33832-33 for information about the hospital drug acquisition cost survey.

Reduction in OPPS payment rates for most items and services

The proposed OPPS payment reductions to recoup a portion of the 340B lump sum payments are the result of the prior 340B payment cuts being implemented in a “budget-neutral” manner. [...]

Continue Reading

This Week in 340B: July 8 – 14, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Matthew David, Margaret Houtz, Jae Hyun Lee, Deepika Raj, Kelsey Reinhardt and Nadine Tejadilla | Jul 16, 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;

In five appealed cases related to rebate models:
- In five cases, the appellant filed its brief.
- In three cases, the plaintiff-appellants filed a reply in support of their emergency motion to dismiss the cross-appeals.
In one case challenging a state law in Tennessee, the defendant filed a response in opposition to the plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction, and the plaintiff filed a memorandum in opposition to the defendant’s motion to dismiss; and in a second case, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss.
In a case challenging a South Dakota bill, amici filed a brief in support of the government’s motion to dismiss.
In two cases challenging Nebraska’s state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the court granted amici’s motion for leave to submit a brief of amicus curiae and, in a second case, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss.
In one case challenging Missouri’s state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the court dismissed without prejudice [...]

Continue Reading