HEALTH & LIFE SCIENCES NEWS

This Week in 340B: March 10 – March 16, 2026

by Emily Jane Cook, Matthew David, Abygail Hoey, Margaret Houtz and Kelsey Reinhardt | Mar 18, 2026 | 340B

Find the 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

In a case brought by a 340B covered entity to challenge the Exclusion Rule, the defendant filed its response to the covered entity plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
In a case by a covered entity against a drug manufacturer alleging breach of contract, the court granted the covered entity’s motion to remand back to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
In a case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Tennessee state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendant filed a reply supporting review of the order denying a stay of discovery.
In a case brought by a trade association for drug manufacturers challenging an Oregon state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendants filed a reply supporting summary judgment.
In a case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging an Oregon state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendants filed a reply supporting summary judgment.
In a [...]

Continue Reading

This Week in 340B: March 3 – March 9, 2026

by Emily Jane Cook, Abygail Hoey, Margaret Houtz, Sydney Merritt Martinez, Kelsey Reinhardt and Nadine Tejadilla | Mar 11, 2026 | 340B

Find the 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; Anti-Trust; Child Sites

In a case challenging a proposed West Virginia state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, plaintiffs-appellees filed a response in opposition to the government’s motion to strike.
In an anti-trust class action case, the court issued an order granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
In a case against the government filed by a group of 340B covered entities seeking relief from the government’s change in its policy on child sites, the court granted the covered entity plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and denied the government’s cross-motion for summary judgment.
In a case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Hawaii state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the court issued a stipulation and order withdrawing the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
In a case brought by a trade association for drug manufacturers challenging a Maine state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the United States filed an Amicus Curiae brief in support of plaintiff appellant.

This Week in 340B: February 24 – March 2, 2026

by Emily Jane Cook, Abygail Hoey, Margaret Houtz and Sydney Merritt Martinez | Mar 4, 2026 | 340B

Find the 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

In one case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Tennessee state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the court issued an order granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
In a case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Hawaii state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a notice of appeal.
In a case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging an Oklahoma state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the court stayed the case pending appeal.
In a case brought by a trade association for drug manufacturers challenging an Oklahoma state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a joint motion to stay the case and the court stayed the proceedings pending resolution of appeal.
In a case brought by a covered entity against the government, the government filed a reply in further support of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
In a case brought by a trade association for drug manufacturers challenging a Rhode Island state law governing contract [...]

Continue Reading

This Week in 340B: February 17 – 23, 2026

by Emily Jane Cook, Margaret Houtz, Sydney Merritt Martinez and Nadine Tejadilla | Feb 25, 2026 | 340B

Find the 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 a case challenging a Vermont law, the government filed a reply in support of its motion to dismiss.
In a case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Hawaii state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the court granted in part and denied in part the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
In a case brought by a trade association for drug manufacturers challenging a Hawaii state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the court granted in part and denied in part the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
In a case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Tennessee state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendant filed a motion for review of a denial to stay discovery.

This Week in 340B: February 10 – 16, 2026

by Emily Jane Cook, Reuben Bank, Abygail Hoey, Kelsey Reinhardt and Nadine Tejadilla | Feb 18, 2026 | 340B

Find the 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 New Mexico law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiffs filed replies in support of their motions for preliminary injunctions.
In a case challenging the government’s rebate model pilot program, the court ordered that the pilot program application notice be vacated and remanded to the issuing agency.
In a case challenging the government’s exclusion rule, the plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment.
In a case challenging a South Dakota law, the plaintiff filed a memorandum in opposition to the government’s motion to dismiss.
In a case challenging a Vermont law, the government filed a reply in support of its motion to dismiss.
In a case challenging an Oregon law, the government filed an opposition to plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
In a case challenging an Oregon law, the government filed a cross-motion for summary judgment.