No. 23-788

Hope Medical Enterprises, Inc., dba Hope Pharmaceuticals v. Fagron Compounding Services, LLC, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2024-01-22
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2) Experienced Counsel
Tags: circuit-split drug-regulation federal-law federal-preemption food-and-drug-administration preemption state-law state-rights statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Trademark JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2024-05-16 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the FDCA preempts state laws prohibiting the in-state sale of unapproved drugs whose sale is also prohibited as a matter of federal law by the FDCA

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Before Congress enacted the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. § 301 et seq., the States had the exclusive power to regulate drug sales within their borders. Wyeth v. Levine, 555 U.S. 555, 566 (2009). After the FDCA’s enactment, States continued to exercise their historical power to regulate drug safety by passing statutes that prohibit the in-state sale of drugs that have not been approved under the FDCA by the federal Food and Drug Administration. Until recently, all courts had agreed that the FDCA does not preempt such state statutes. H.g., Allergan, Inc. v. Athena Cosmetics, Inc., 738 F.3d 1350, 1354-56 (Fed. Cir. 2018). The Ninth Circuit created a circuit split in Nexus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Central Admixture Pharmacy Services, Inc., 48 F.4th 1040 (9th Cir. 2022), where it held that the FDCA preempts state drug-approval statutes even when there is no difference in the requirements of state and federal law. In the decision below, the Ninth Circuit followed Nexus to hold that the FDCA preempts the enforcement of state drugapproval statutes against an unapproved drug that is also undisputedly illegal under the FDCA. The question presented is: Whether the FDCA preempts state laws prohibiting the in-state sale of unapproved drugs whose sale is also prohibited as a matter of federal law by the FDCA.

Docket Entries

2024-05-20
Petition DENIED.
2024-04-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/16/2024.
2024-04-26
Reply of petitioner Hope Medical Enterprises, Inc. DBA Hope Pharmaceuticals filed. (Distributed)
2024-04-12
Brief of respondents Fagron Compounding Services, LLC, et al. in opposition filed.
2024-03-01
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 15, 2024. See Rule 30.1.
2024-02-29
Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 14, 2024 to April 13, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
2024-02-13
Response Requested. (Due March 14, 2024)
2024-02-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/23/2024.
2024-01-24
Waiver of right of respondents Fagron Compounding Services, LLC, et al. to respond filed.
2024-01-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 21, 2024)
2023-12-17
Application (23A530) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until January 16, 2024.
2023-12-07
Application (23A530) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from December 31, 2023 to January 16, 2024, submitted to Justice Kagan.

Attorneys

Fagron Compounding Services, LLC, et al.
Christopher LandauEllis George LLP, Respondent
Christopher LandauEllis George LLP, Respondent
Hope Medical Enterprises, Inc. DBA Hope Pharmaceuticals
Jeffrey S. BucholtzKing & Spalding LLP, Petitioner
Jeffrey S. BucholtzKing & Spalding LLP, Petitioner