This Week in 340B: October 22

This Week in 340B: October 22 – 28, 2024

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: HRSA; Contract Pharmacy; OtherIn an appealed qui tam action alleging that various drug manufacturers failed to charge accurate ceiling prices to 340B Covered Entities, an amicus brief was filed in support of the appellees.In a case challenging HRSA’s policy prohibiting all manufacturer conditions on 340B transactions, the parties filed a joint status report.In two cases challenging proposed Missouri state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss and a memorandum in support thereof in one case and the defendants filed a reply in support of the defendant’s motion to dismiss in a second case. In addition,... Read the complete article here...© 2024 McDermott Will & Emery

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: HRSA; Contract Pharmacy; Other In an appealed qui tam action alleging that various drug manufacturers failed to charge accurate ceiling prices to 340B Covered Entities, an amicus brief was filed in support of the appellees.

In a case challenging HRSA’s policy prohibiting all manufacturer conditions on 340B transactions, the parties filed a joint status report. In two cases challenging proposed Missouri state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss and a memorandum in support thereof in one case and the defendants filed a reply in support of the defendant’s motion to dismiss in a second case. In addition, plaintiffs in the second case filed a memorandum in opposition to proposed intervenors’ motion to intervene.

.