Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The Cantero Opinion: The Supreme Court Leaves National Bank Preemption in Limbo
In That Case: Cantero v. Bank of America
SCOTUS applies the "discovery rule" in timely copyright infringement claim; Cher wins in Marital Settlement Agreement vs Copyright Grant Termination Notices; Student Athletes Win Revenue Share and NIL
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: The U.S. Supreme Court’s Pending Ruling on National Bank Preemption: A Discussion of Cantero v. Bank of America, N.A.
U.S. District Court Addresses Federal Preemption for State Credit Reporting Laws
State Laws on Screening and Federal Preemption – Where Are We Now and Where Are We Heading? — FCRA Focus Podcast
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: What the Recent Developments in Federal Preemption for National and State Banks Mean for Bank and Nonbank Consumer Financial Services Providers
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 24 - Special Edition: Spotlight on the Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers of New Jersey
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 386: Listen and Learn -- Federal and State Powers (Con Law)
[Podcast] Cellular Agriculture and the Evolving Legal/Regulatory Landscape: A Conversation with Ahmed Khan
Keeping Up With the Bureau Episode 2: FCRA Preemption Issues, Infringing State Laws, and the CFPB's Position
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Rules on PAGA, Fifth Circuit Rules on COVID-19 Under WARN, Illinois Expands Bereavement Leave - Employment Law This Week®
California Employment News: US Supreme Court “Viking River” Decision Brings PAGA Relief for CA Employers
AGG Talks: Background Screening - What is FCRA Preemption, and Why Should You Care?
Law of the Land? Cannabis, Preemption, and SCOTUS [More with McGlinchey Ep. 37]
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 162: Listen and Learn -- Federal and State Powers (Con Law)
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
Case In Point: Recent Developments in Employment Law
Employment Law Now V-96- LOTS of Big Employment Law Developments
Nota Bene Episode 101: Catching up with Global Climate Regulation with Nico van Aelstyn
The Supreme Court’s day started with the specter of yet another leak of a reproductive rights decision having occurred....more
On August 15, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (the “Tenth Circuit”) issued its decision in Pharmaceutical Care Management Association (PCMA) v. Mulready, one of the first major opinions to further define...more
Recent court trends suggest that preemption under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) may not apply to certain state laws that regulate pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), including state laws governing Maximum...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent unanimous decision clears the way for state regulation of Pharmacy Benefit Managers (“PBMs”). Rutledge v. Pharm. Care Mgmt. Ass’n, 141 S. Ct. 474 (2020). At issue before the High Court was...more
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against pharmacy benefit managers (“PBMs”) last month, in a decision that marks a major win for state regulators. (See Rutledge v. Pharmaceutical Care Management Association, 2020 WL 7250098 (U.S....more
Recently, the Supreme Court released its decision in Rutledge v. Pharmaceutical Care Management Association. The case considers whether the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) preempts an Arkansas state...more
In a recently decided case, Rutledge v. Pharmaceutical Care Management Association, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) does not preempt an Arkansas statute that...more
In the recently-decided Rutledge v. Pharmaceutical Care Management Association (“PCMA”), the Supreme Court found 8–0 (Justice Barrett did not take part) that ERISA did not preempt an Arkansas state law that established...more
On December 10, 2020, the Supreme Court in Rutledge v. Pharmaceutical Care Management Association held that ERISA does not pre-empt an Arkansas law regulating PBM prescription drug payment rates to pharmacies because it...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued a unanimous decision in Rutledge v. Pharmaceutical Care Management Ass’n, which supports the validity of state statutes that regulate reimbursement rates pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs)...more
The U.S. Supreme Court handed down a decision on Thursday of last week that will impact state-level regulation of pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) by holding that an Arkansas law regulating PBMs was not preempted by the...more
Summary The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously upheld an Arkansas statute that regulates the price that pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) pay retail pharmacies for prescription drugs. ...more
In Rutledge v. Pharmaceutical Care Mgt. Assoc., — U.S. –, 2020 WL 7250098 (Dec. 10, 2020), the Supreme Court held that ERISA’s broad express preemption will not reach a state law that focuses on the price of prescription drug...more
On Dec. 10, the United States Supreme Court issued its ruling in Rutledge v. Pharmaceutical Care Management Association. The Court reversed the 8th Circuit to uphold a state’s ability to regulate the price at which pharmacy...more
An Arkansas law regulating pharmacy benefit managers’ (PBMs) generic drug reimbursement rates, and affecting the cost of prescription drugs provided under ERISA-governed benefit plans and the administration of those plans, is...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2019 decision in Merck Sharp & Dohme, Inc. v. Albrecht, 139 S.Ct. 1668 (2019), discussed... addressed impossibility preemption in label change lawsuits. In Albrecht, the Supreme Court purported to...more
In the simplest case for federal preemption, federal law prohibits conduct that a state tort duty would require, such as a change in the design of an approved medical device to cure an alleged defect. Because federal law is...more
In 2019, significant developments are expected on issues that have been percolating in the mass tort and class action litigation arena for several years. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on cases relating to...more
The U.S. Supreme Court today agreed to consider a Third Circuit ruling that revived litigation over Merck’s alleged failure to warn about a risk of femoral fractures from its osteoporosis drug Fosamax. The precise question...more
Last June, in Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc., the Supreme Court handed down its interpretation of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act ("BPCIA") for the approval of biosimilar drugs. As we reported at the time, the...more
As we have previously reported, on June 12, 2017, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Amgen v. Sandoz holding that notice of commercial marketing may be given prior to FDA approval. The Court also held that no...more
On April 26, 2017, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Amgen v. Sandoz, where the parties have asked the Court to interpret two of the biosimilar patent dance provisions of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation...more
On April 26, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in the much-anticipated Amgen v. Sandoz case, representing the first time the Court has had to grapple with the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act...more
Federal Circuit Interprets Statutory Requirements for Biosimilar Regulatory Pathway - Amgen Inc., v. Sandoz Inc., (Fed. Cir. July 21, 2015): In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...more
In the watershed case of PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing, the United States Supreme Court determined that federal law preempts state law failure-to-warn claims against generic pharmaceutical manufacturers. More specifically, Mensing...more