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; GPO Prohibition; Anti-Trust; Other
- A group of commonly-owned drug manufacturers filed a complaint against the Tennessee attorney general to challenge a state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements.
- In a case challenging a Nebraska state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, a group of amici filed an amici curiae brief in support of the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
- In a case challenging the Health Resources and Services Administration’s (HRSA) policy limiting the circumstances in which covered entities can use their group purchasing arrangements to purchase non-340B drugs, the defendant filed a cross motion for summary judgment and opposition to plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
- In an appealed case challenging a Louisiana law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the intervenor-defendant filed a motion for leave to file a sur-reply to appellant’s reply brief.
- In an anti-trust class action case, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff’s amended complaint.
- In a case challenging a Missouri state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendants filed a supplemental brief in support of their motion to dismiss. In the same case, the plaintiffs filed a supplemental brief in opposition of the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
- In a case by a covered entity against HRSA, HRSA filed a response to the covered entity’s supplemental brief in support of its motion for preliminary injunction, a group of drug manufacturers filed a motion for leave to file an amicus brief in support of HRSA, and the covered entity filed a supplemental brief requested by the court.
