§Why CasetextPricing

Eckhardt et al v. Qualitest Pharmaceuticals Inc et al

RESPONSE in Opposition to 47 MOTION to Dismiss 22 Amended Complaint/Counterclaim/Crossclaim etc. MOTION to Dismiss 22 Amended Complaint/Counterclaim/Crossclaim etc.

23 Cited authorities

  1. Wyeth v. Levine

    555 U.S. 555 (2009)   Cited 1,474 times   101 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the FDA's drug labeling judgments pursuant to the FDCA did not obstacle preempt state law products liability claims

  2. Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr

    518 U.S. 470 (1996)   Cited 2,464 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the presence of a state-law damages remedy for violations of FDA requirements does not impose an additional requirement upon medical device manufacturers but "merely provides another reason for manufacturers to comply with . . . federal law"

  3. Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.

    505 U.S. 504 (1992)   Cited 2,441 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an express warranty was not a "requirement ... imposed under State law" because the obligation was imposed by the warrantor

  4. Pliva, Inc. v. Mensing

    564 U.S. 604 (2011)   Cited 761 times   143 Legal Analyses
    Holding that state tort law that required generic drug manufacturers to provide adequate warning labels was preempted where federal law required manufacturers to use the same labels as their brand-name counterparts

  5. English v. General Electric Co.

    496 U.S. 72 (1990)   Cited 1,342 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a tort arising from whistleblower retaliation at a nuclear facility was insufficiently related to radiological safety aspects in the facility's operation

  6. Altria Grp., Inc. v. Good

    555 U.S. 70 (2008)   Cited 663 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that federal law did not preempt common-law fraud claim against cigarette manufacturer based on advertising of light cigarettes

  7. Geier v. Am. Honda Motor Co.

    529 U.S. 861 (2000)   Cited 809 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding the absence of an express pre-emption clause “does not bar the ordinary working of conflict pre-emption principles”

  8. Bates v. Dow Agrosciences LLC

    544 U.S. 431 (2005)   Cited 563 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a preemption clause barring state laws "in addition to or different" from a federal Act does not interfere with an "equivalent" state provision

  9. Freightliner Corp. v. Myrick

    514 U.S. 280 (1995)   Cited 639 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a suspended Safety Act standard regarding tractor-trailer air brakes did not preempt common law tort actions

  10. Fla. Avocado Growers v. Paul

    373 U.S. 132 (1963)   Cited 1,581 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding federal regulation concerning maturity of avocados did not preempt California regulation, where it was not impossible for growers to comply with both regulations

  11. Section 331 - Prohibited acts

    21 U.S.C. § 331   Cited 1,537 times   110 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting "[t]he introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of any... drug ... that is adulterated or misbranded

  12. Section 352 - Misbranded drugs and devices

    21 U.S.C. § 352   Cited 752 times   75 Legal Analyses
    Setting labeling requirements for drug products

  13. Section 201.57 - Specific requirements on content and format of labeling for human prescription drug and biological products described in Section 201.56(b)(1)

    21 C.F.R. § 201.57   Cited 258 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Discussing "Black Box Warnings"