Contract Pharmacy Archives | HEALTH & LIFE SCIENCES NEWS

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: January 20 – 27, 2026

by Emily Jane Cook, Jae Hyun Lee, Kelsey Reinhardt, Sydney Merritt Martinez and Abygail Hoey | Jan 28, 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; Rebate Model

In two cases challenging a North Dakota state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendants filed a reply.
A 340B Covered Entity filed a complaint against the government to challenge a Medicare reimbursement rule.
A drug manufacturer filed a complaint to challenge a New Mexico state law governing contract pharmacy arrangement.
In a case challenging a Mississippi state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment.
In a case challenging the government’s rebate model pilot program, the court voluntarily dismissed the appeal.
In a case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging an Oklahoma state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendant filed a reply to the response to motion.
In a case brought by a trade association of drug manufacturers challenging a Maine state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the court denied plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction.

This Week in 340B: January 13 – 19, 2026

by Emily Jane Cook, Nadine Tejadilla, Jae Hyun Lee, Sydney Merritt Martinez, Abygail Hoey and Deepika Raj | Jan 20, 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; Rebate Model

In a case challenging a Vermont law, the government moved to file an amicus brief.
In a case challenging a North Dakota state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a response to the court’s order to show cause concerning consolidation.
In a case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging an Oklahoma state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendant filed a motion for protective order and to stay discovery and the plaintiffs filed a memorandum in opposition to the defendant’s renewed motion to stay discovery and for protective order.
In a case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Hawaii state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a brief in support of its motion for a preliminary injunction.
In a case brought by a trade association of drug manufacturers challenging an Oregon state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendants moved for summary judgment.
In a case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging an [...]

Continue Reading

This Week in 340B: January 6 – 12, 2026

by Emily Jane Cook, Abygail Hoey, Nadine Tejadilla, Sydney Merritt Martinez and Kelsey Reinhardt | Jan 13, 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 by a trade association of drug manufacturers challenging a Rhode Island state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
In a case challenging a South Dakota law, amici curiae filed a brief in support of the government’s motion to dismiss.
In two cases challenging a Vermont law:
- Plaintiff filed a reply in support of its motion for a preliminary injunction.
- The government filed a memorandum in support of its partial motion to dismiss and in opposition to plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.
In a case challenging the government’s rebate model pilot program, the plaintiff filed an opposition to motion to intervene on appeal.

This Week in 340B: Holiday Season Overview

by Emily Jane Cook, Jae Hyun Lee, Kelsey Reinhardt, Abygail Hoey and Deepika Raj | Jan 7, 2026 | 340B

This special issue of This Week in 340B covers December 16, 2025 – January 5, 2026. 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 North Dakota state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements:
- Plaintiffs filed responses to summary judgment motions;
- The courts ordered the parties to show cause as to why the cases should not be consolidated; and
- The defendants filed a response agreeing to consolidation.
In a case brought by a 340B Covered Entity alleging breach of contract by an insurer, the insurer filed a motion to dismiss.
In a case challenging the government’s rebate model pilot program:
- Defendant filed an opposition to plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction;
- Plaintiff filed an omnibus opposition to a number of motions to intervene filed by proposed intervenors;
- Proposed intervenors filed a brief in opposition to plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction;
- Proposed intervenors filed a reply in support of their motions to intervene;
- Plaintiff filed a reply in support of its motion for preliminary injunction;
- The court defined proposed intervenors’ motions to intervene and granted them leave to proceed as amici curiae;
- The court granted plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction;
- Defendant filed a notice of appeal from the court’s granting of the preliminary injunction; and
- Proposed intervenors filed a notice of appeal from the court’s denial of their motions to [...]
  
  Continue Reading

This Week in 340B: December 9 – 15, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Matthew David, Sydney Merritt Martinez, Kelsey Reinhardt and Nadine Tejadilla | Dec 17, 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; Other

In a case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Colorado state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a response to the motion to dismiss. (Contract Pharmacy)
In a case brought by a covered entity against the government, the government filed a memorandum in opposition to the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. (Other)
A drug manufacturer filed a complaint against the Attorney General of New Mexico to challenge a New Mexico law governing contract pharmacy arrangements. (Contract Pharmacy)
A 340B Covered Entity filed a complaint against the government to challenge the government’s policy regarding GPO arrangements. (Other)
A 340B Covered Entity filed a breach of contract claim against an insurer. (Other)
In a case against HRSA challenging its certification of a group of entities as 340B-eligible, plaintiffs filed a response in opposition to an intervenor’s motion to intervene. (Other)
In a case challenging a South Dakota law, plaintiffs filed reply in support of their motion for a preliminary [...]

Continue Reading

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

by McDermott Will & Emery, Emily Jane Cook, Matthew David, Abygail Hoey, Sydney Merritt Martinez, Deepika Raj, Kelsey Reinhardt and Nadine Tejadilla | Nov 26, 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 one case by a drug manufacturer challenging an Arkansas state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the drug manufacturer filed a reply in support of its motion for summary judgment and a response to the government and intervenor-defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
In one case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Colorado state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a notice of appeal and the defendants filed a reply to the response to the motion to dismiss.
In a case challenging a South Dakota state bill, plaintiffs filed a brief in support of their motion for a preliminary injunction.
A drug manufacturer filed a complaint in Rhode Island to challenge a Rhode Island state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements.
A group of drug manufacturers filed a complaint in Vermont to challenge a Vermont state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements.
In one case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Vermont state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff [...]

Continue Reading

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

by Emily Jane Cook, Reuben Bank, Matthew David, Abygail Hoey, Jae Hyun Lee, Sydney Merritt Martinez and Deepika Raj | Nov 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; Other

In three cases brought by drug manufacturers challenging an Oklahoma state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, defendants filed a notice of appeal.
In one case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Colorado state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, defendants filed a motion to dismiss.
In two consolidated cases brought by drug manufacturers challenging a Nebraska state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction and a brief in support thereof.
In two cases brought by drug manufacturers challenging a Utah state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, plaintiffs filed responses to the defendants’ notices of supplemental authority.
In one case by a trade association of drug manufacturers challenging a Rhode Island state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, plaintiff filed a reply in support of its motion for preliminary injunction.
In one case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a North Dakota state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, defendants filed a cross motion for summary judgment.
In [...]

Continue Reading

This Week in 340B: November 4 – 10, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Reuben Bank and Sydney Merritt Martinez | Nov 12, 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 one case by a trade association of drug manufacturers challenging a Maine state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a notice of supplemental authority in support of its motion for preliminary injunction.
In one case by a trade association of drug manufacturers challenging a Rhode Island state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, an amicus brief was filed in support of the defendant’s defense against plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction.
In one case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Colorado state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the Plaintiff filed a reply in support of its motion for a preliminary injunction.
In three cases brought by drug manufacturers challenging a Utah state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendants filed notices of supplemental authority.

This Week in 340B: October 28 – November 3, 2025

by Emily Jane Cook, Reuben Bank, Abygail Hoey, Matthew David, Sydney Merritt Martinez and Kelsey Reinhardt | Nov 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: Contract Pharmacy; Other

In one case by a trade association of drug manufacturers challenging a Maine state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a reply in support of its motion for preliminary injunction.
In one case by a trade association of drug manufacturers challenging a Rhode Island state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendant filed a memorandum in objection to plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction.
In one case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Hawaii state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendant filed a reply memorandum in support of the defendants’ motion to dismiss.
In one case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Colorado state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the court denied the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.
In one case brought by a trade association for drug manufacturers challenging a Colorado state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendants filed a reply to response to the defendants’ motion to dismiss.
In one case brought by [...]

Continue Reading

BLOG EDITORS

STAY CONNECTED

TOPICS

ARCHIVES

RECENT POSTS