340B covered entity Archives | 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 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.

This Week in 340B: January 27 – February 2, 2026

by Emily Jane Cook, Reuben Bank, Abygail Hoey, Jae Hyun Lee, Sydney Merritt Martinez and Nadine Tejadilla | Feb 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; Other

In a case challenging a Vermont law:
- The court granted a motion to file an amici curiae brief.
- Plaintiffs filed a reply in support of their motion for a preliminary injunction and in opposition to the government’s partial motion to dismiss.
In a case against HRSA challenging its certification of a group of entities as 340B-eligible, the court granted a motion to intervene.
In a case challenging a Vermont law, the plaintiff filed a memorandum in opposition to the government’s motion to dismiss.
In two cases challenging a New Mexico law, the government filed responses to the plaintiffs’ complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief.
In one case challenging a New Mexico law, the American Hospital Association filed a motion for leave to file an amicus curiae brief.
In two cases challenging a North Dakota state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the court issued a consolidation order.
In two cases challenging an Oregon state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, [...]

Continue Reading

This Week in 340B: March 25 – 31, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Matthew David, Margaret Houtz, Deepika Raj, Kelsey Reinhardt and Nadine Tejadilla | Apr 2, 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; Other

In four cases against the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) alleging that HRSA unlawfully refused to approve drug manufacturers’ proposed rebate models, 37 state and regional hospital associates filed an amici brief in support of HRSA.
In a breach of contract case filed by a covered entity against a Medicare Advantage plan, the covered entity dismissed the case in its entirety with prejudice.
In an appealed case challenging a proposed West Virginia law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, plaintiff-appellees filed a brief, and in another similarly appealed case, appellants filed a reply brief.
In a case challenging a proposed state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements in Missouri, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with the Eighth Circuit.

This Week in 340B: March 11 – 17, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Matthew David, Margaret Houtz, Jae Hyun Lee, Deepika Raj, Kelsey Reinhardt and Nadine Tejadilla | Mar 19, 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; Other

In three appealed cases challenging a proposed Louisiana law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the appellee filed a motion to consolidate.
In a case challenging the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA’s) decision to prevent drug manufacturers from unilaterally implementing rebate models, defendants filed a cross motion for summary judgment and opposition to the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
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 motion for summary judgment.
In three cases challenging a proposed state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements in Missouri, defendants and intervenors in each case filed answers to amended complaints.
In four cases against HRSA alleging that HRSA unlawfully refused to approve drug manufacturers’ proposed rebate models:
- In three cases, the defendants filed a cross motion for summary judgment and opposition to the [...]
  
  Continue Reading

This Week in 340B: February 25 – March 3, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Reuben Bank, Matthew David, Margaret Houtz, Jae Hyun Lee, Deepika Raj, Kelsey Reinhardt and Nadine Tejadilla | Mar 5, 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: Antitrust; Contract Pharmacy; HRSA Audit Process; Rebate Model

In an antitrust class action case, the court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
In an appealed case challenging a proposed state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, a group of amici filed an amicus brief in support of appellees.
In an appealed case challenging a proposed state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, defendants-appellants filed an opening brief.
In a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case, the plaintiff filed a reply in support of its motion to strike the government’s motion for summary judgment.
In one one Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) audit process case, the plaintiff filed a supplemental brief in support of the plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction.
A group of 340B covered entities filed a complaint against a group of commercial payors, alleging that the payors were in breach of their contracts by failing to pay the proper amounts for 340B-acquired drugs.
In three cases challenging a proposed state law governing contract [...]

Continue Reading

This Week in 340B: February 18 – 24, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Reuben Bank, Matthew David, Margaret Houtz, Jae Hyun Lee, Kelsey Reinhardt and Nadine Tejadilla | Feb 27, 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; HRSA Audit Process; Rebate Model; Other

In one Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) audit process case, the government filed a memorandum in support of the government’s motion to dismiss.
In a case by a drug manufacture challenging a state law, the government filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings and the parties filed a joint motion for an amended protective order.
In a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case, the government filed a response to a motion to strike the government’s motion for summary judgment.
In a suit by a 340B covered entity against HRSA, the covered entity filed a notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice.
In an appealed case challenging a proposed state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the appellees filed their opening brief.
A 340B covered entity filed a complaint against HRSA to challenge HRSA’s decision to allow a manufacturer’s audit.
In five cases against HRSA alleging that HRSA unlawfully refused to approve drug manufacturers’ [...]

Continue Reading

This Week in 340B: February 11 – 17, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Matthew David, Margaret Houtz, Jae Hyun Lee, Patrick Moore, Deepika Raj, Kelsey Reinhardt and Nadine Tejadilla | Feb 19, 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; Medicare Payment; Rebate Model

In a case challenging a proposed state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements in Missouri, the court granted in part and denied in part defendant’s and intervenor’s separate motions to dismiss.
In a breach of contract claim filed by a 340B covered entity against several related party Medicare Advantage plans, defendants filed a reply in support of their motion to compel plaintiff’s claims spreadsheets.
In five cases against the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) alleging that HRSA unlawfully refused to approve drug manufacturers’ proposed rebate models:
1. Five amicus briefs were filed in support of the drug manufacturer.
2. In four such cases, drug manufacturers filed a joint position statement on consolidation.
3. In one such case, a drug manufacturer filed a notice of opposition to consolidation and memorandum in opposition to intervenors.
4. In one such case, the government filed a position statement in support of consolidation.

BLOG EDITORS

STAY CONNECTED

TOPICS

ARCHIVES

RECENT POSTS