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, a subscription product from McDermott+Consulting.
Issues at Stake: Contract Pharmacy; Medicare Payment
- In the consolidated Medicare payment cut case, the plaintiffs filed a memorandum opposing the government’s motion to dismiss.
- In a case challenging proposed state laws governing contract pharmacy arrangements, a pharmaceutical company filed a motion for preliminary injunctive relief.
- In a separate case challenging proposed state laws governing contract pharmacy arrangements, defendant state attorney general filed a motion in opposition to plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunctive relief.
- A drug manufacturer filed two separate complaints against two state attorneys general to challenge state laws governing contract pharmacy arrangements.
- A nonprofit organization filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the 340B Covered Entity plaintiff-appellant in a contract pharmacy case.
- In five separate cases challenging state laws governing contract pharmacy arrangements:
-
- Two plaintiffs filed separate motions for preliminary injunctions;
- Two state defendants filed answers to the plaintiffs’ complaints as well as oppositions to the plaintiffs’ motions for a preliminary injunction;
- One state defendant filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, in response to which the plaintiff filed a motion for an extension to respond; and
- A manufacturer plaintiff voluntarily dismissed its complaint against a state attorney general.
-
