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; Rebate Model; Other

• In an appealed case challenging a Louisiana law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the appellant filed its reply brief. 
• In one case against the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) related to rebate models, the government filed its reply.
• In a case by a 340B covered entity against HRSA, the covered entity filed a supplemental brief in support of its motion for preliminary injunction.
• In four cases challenging proposed state laws governing contract pharmacy arrangements in Utah, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota: 
  • In Utah, the plaintiff filed an amended motion for preliminary injunctive relief.
  • In Nebraska and South Dakota, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss.
  • In North Dakota, the defendant filed an answer to plaintiffs’ complaint.

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 six cases against HRSA related to rebate models:
  • In five cases, defendants filed a reply in further support of their motion for summary judgment.
  • In one case, the plaintiff filed a reply in support of its motion for summary judgment and in opposition to the government’s cross-motion for summary judgment.
• In a case against Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) challenging its certification of a group of entities as 340B-eligible, defendants filed a memorandum of points and authorities in support of their partial motion to dismiss.
• A trade association representing drug manufacturers filed a complaint to challenge a Utah state law restricting contract pharmacy arrangements.
• In two appealed cases challenging a Louisiana law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, a group of amici filed amicus briefs.

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

• In five cases against the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) related to rebate models:
  • In one case, amici filed an amicus brief in support of the government.
  • In one case, a plaintiff filed a brief in opposition to defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment and reply in support of summary judgment.
  • In four cases, intervenor defendants filed a reply brief in support of their cross motion for summary judgment.
• In a case challenging a Utah law that would restrict manufacturers’ ability to restrict contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction.
• In two appealed cases challenging a Louisiana law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendant and intervenor-defendant filed their briefs.
• In a case by a drug manufacturer challenging an Arkansas state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the drug manufacturer filed a motion to strike a declaration.
• Two drug manufacturer filed four separate complaints to challenge four state laws restricting contract pharmacy [...]
  
  Continue Reading