HEALTH & LIFE SCIENCES NEWS

This Week in 340B: July 7 – July 13, 2026

by Emily Jane Cook, Margaret Houtz, Sydney Merritt Martinez and Deepika Raj | Jul 15, 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 consolidated case brought by a drug manufacturer and a trade association for drug manufacturers challenging a Hawaii state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, two nonparties filed memoranda in opposition to the plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery.
In a case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Missouri state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendant filed an amended motion to dismiss.
In an appealed case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Tennessee state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendant-appellee filed a response brief.

This Week in 340B: June 30 – July 6, 2026

by Emily Jane Cook, Margaret Houtz, Jae Hyun Lee, Deepika Raj and Kelsey Reinhardt | Jul 10, 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 a qui tam action arguing that private parties can bring suits to enforce the 340B Statute, the defendants filed a renewed motion to dismiss plaintiff’s first amended complaint, and two individual defendants filed supplemental memorandums in support of defendants’ renewed motion to dismiss.
In three consolidated cases brought by a trade association and drug manufacturers challenging a Louisiana state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the court entered its judgment.
In an appealed case challenging the 340B Rebate Model Pilot Program, the appellants filed a reply brief.
A covered entity filed a complaint against a drug manufacturer alleging that the covered entity is being denied access to 340B pricing due to data reporting requirements of the manufacturer.
In an appealed case challenging the district court’s denial of a drug manufacturer’s motion for a preliminary injunction, the court of appeals affirmed the district court’s ruling.

This Week in 340B: June 23 – 29, 2026

by Emily Jane Cook, Reuben Bank, Abygail Hoey, Margaret Houtz, Jae Hyun Lee and Kelsey Reinhardt | Jul 1, 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 an appealed case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a North Dakota state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, a group of amici filed an amicus curiae brief.
In five cases brought by drug manufacturers challenging a Utah state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiffs files opposition briefs to the state government’s motions to dismiss.
In a case brought by a drug manufacturer seeking judgment on its interpretation of the definition of “patient”, a group of proposed intervenors filed a motion to intervene.
In an appealed case challenging the 340B Rebate Model Pilot Program, a group of manufacturers filed a reply brief regarding the denial of their motion to intervene.
In one appealed case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Tennessee state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendant-appellee filed a response brief.
In a case brought by a group of 340B covered entities, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York issued a [...]

Continue Reading

This Week in 340B: June 16 – 22, 2026

by Emily Jane Cook, Abygail Hoey, Margaret Houtz and Jae Hyun Lee | Jun 24, 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 an appealed case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a North Dakota state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendant-appellants filed their brief.
In one case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging an Oregon state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, intervenor Oregon Primary Care Association filed a cross-motion for summary judgement and response to plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
In one case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging an Oregon state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, amici curiae filed a brief in support of defendants’ motion for summary judgement.
In one appealed case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Tennessee state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the Department of Justice filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiff-appellants.

This Week in 340B: June 9 – 15, 2026

by Emily Jane Cook, Matthew David, Abygail Hoey, Margaret Houtz, Sydney Merritt Martinez and Kelsey Reinhardt | Jun 17, 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 by a covered entity against an insurance company alleging breach of contract, the insurance company filed an amended answer and counterclaims to the covered entity’s complaint.
In a case brought by a 340B Covered Entity against the government to challenge the government’s policy regarding GPO arrangements, the parties filed a stipulation of dismissal pursuant to their settlement agreement.
In one appealed case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Tennessee state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff-appellants filed their opening brief, and in a second, similarly appealed case, the Department of Justice filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiff-appellants.
In a case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Colorado state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss.
In two cases brought by a drug manufacturer challenging an Oregon state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, defendants filed a motion for summary judgement and opposition to plaintiff’s motion for summary [...]

Continue Reading