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. 

Issues at Stake: Contract Pharmacy; Other

• In a case challenging a state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a motion to compel compliance with third-party subpoenas and a covered entity moved to intervene as a defendant.
• In a case challenging a state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff filed a memorandum in support of its motion for preliminary injunctive relief and in opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss.
• In a case challenging a state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss and a memorandum of law in opposition to the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.
• In an appealed qui tam action alleging that various drug manufacturers failed to charge accurate ceiling prices to 340B Covered Entities, the plaintiff-realtor filed its opening brief.
• In a case challenging a state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendant filed its answer to the plaintiff’s complaint and the plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary injunction.
• A drug manufacturer filed suit against the Missouri attorney general to challenge a state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements.

[View source.]