New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has signed a law requiring health insurance carriers in that state to encrypt individuals' personal information. This new law will be enforced in conjunction with the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act (NJCFA), and failure to obey the law will be classified as a violation of the NJCFA, which could result in financial penalties for the carriers. The new legislation may also affect business associates through the contractual terms of business associate agreements.… Continue Reading
Drug and medical device manufacturers are often faced with difficult challenges in determining the country of origin for their products, which are often sourced, processed and manufactured in multiple countries. As detailed by the article "Origin of the Pieces: How to Determine a Pharmaceutical Product's 'Country of Origin,'" written by Reed Smith lawyers Jeffrey Orenstein and Lorraine Campos, there are a variety of factors that must be taken into consideration when answering the country of origin question for a pharmaceutical product - chief among which is who is asking the question. This article provides an overview of the principal regulatory schemes and their country of origin standards in order to help provide clarity to pharmaceutical companies in an often confusing and frustrating process.… Continue Reading
This morning, May 18, 2009, the California Supreme Court issued its ruling in In re Tobacco II Cases, a case that will shape how parties litigate California Unfair Competition Law ("UCL") claims. At issue was the viability of UCL actions that seek to certify a class despite the fact that not all putative plaintiffs suffered injury as a result of a defendant's allegedly unfair practice. Since California's infamous UCL (also known as Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.) is often used to add broad "consumer fraud" claims to product liability lawsuits against the life sciences industry (as well as many other industries), the outcome of In re Tobacco II garnered substantial attention...… Continue Reading
This morning, March 3, 2009, the California Supreme Court heard argument in In re Tobacco II Cases, a case that will shape how parties litigate California Unfair Competition Law ("UCL") claims. At issue is the viability of UCL actions that seek to certify a class despite the fact that not all putative plaintiffs suffered injury as a result of a defendant's allegedly unfair practice. Since California's infamous UCL (also known as Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.) is often used to add broad "consumer fraud" claims to product liability lawsuits against the life sciences industry (as well as many other industries), the outcome of In re Tobacco II is garnering considerable attention.… Continue Reading
UPDATE: After more than two years, on February 3, 2009, the California Supreme Court finally set argument in an important UCL case, In re Tobacco II for Tuesday, March 3, 2009, at 9:00 a.m., in San Francisco. With the Court’s 90-day rule, a decision can be expected by June 1, 2009 in the ordinary course. California product … Continue Reading
Earlier this week, in Uhm v. Humana, Inc., --- F.3d --- , 2008 WL 3891592, No. 06-35672 (9th Cir. Aug. 25, 2008), the Ninth Circuit upheld a lower court ruling that the express preemption provision of the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act preempted state law claims arising from the plaintiffs' prescription drug benefits provided by a Medicare supplement insurer.… Continue Reading
