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 government filed a reply in support of its cross motion to dismiss.
- In a case challenging proposed state laws governing contract pharmacy arrangements, an amicus brief was filed in support of defendant’s opposition to plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
- The defendants in four separate cases, all of which challenged a state law concerning contract pharmacy arrangements, filed motions to consolidate their respective cases.
- In a case challenging a state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, advocacy groups representing 340B Covered Entities filed an amicus brief in support of defendants’ motion to dismiss and in opposition to plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction.
- In a case challenging a state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a memorandum opposing the defendants’ motion to dismiss.
- In a case challenging a state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint.
- In a breach of contract claim filed by a 340B Covered Entity against several related party Medicare Advantage plans, the Medicare Advantage plans filed a reply in support of its motion to dismiss the first amended complaint.
