Add to ORKGThe purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between federal medical device regulation and state common law tort actions. Specifically, the issue to be addressed is whether the Medical Devices Act and regulations promulgated thereunder preempt state law damage actions brought by injured consumers against device manufacturers. An analysis of the preemptive provision of the Medical Devices Act and case law construing this provision is set forth below. The United States Supreme Court\u27s recent preemption analysis in Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc. will be used as a guide in establishing a useful method for determining whether state tort claims arising out of consumer injuries resulting from defective medical devices are preempte...
Medical device preemption is highly controversial because it provides medical device companies with ...
Federal agencies now regulate the manufacture, design, and labeling of hundreds of consumer products...
The Supreme Court\u27s decision in Riegel v. Medtronic immunized medical device manufacturers from c...
The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between federal medical device regulation a...
Should manufacturers of cutting-edge medical devices ever be able to avoid liability from common law...
Recent cases have shown that federal preemption is a very powerfuldefense for a pharmaceutical or me...
Under the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 (MDA), Congress established a complex scheme for regulat...
Perhaps the most dramatic indication that the courts have shifted attitudes on health and safety mat...
This symposium was convened to address the growing and seemingly conflicting jurisprudence governing...
A circuit split regarding the preemptive scope of the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 (MDA) has wi...
This comment discusses the Medical Device Amendments of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and...
I start with a brief history of the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 and explain why that history d...
The U.S. Supreme Court’s important ruling in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co., Inc. v. Bartlett concerns wh...
The 21st Century Cures Act introduced innovative changes to the Food and Drug Administration’s regul...
The paper aims to provide an overview of the potential liability of a manufacturer or distributor or...
Medical device preemption is highly controversial because it provides medical device companies with ...
Federal agencies now regulate the manufacture, design, and labeling of hundreds of consumer products...
The Supreme Court\u27s decision in Riegel v. Medtronic immunized medical device manufacturers from c...
The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between federal medical device regulation a...
Should manufacturers of cutting-edge medical devices ever be able to avoid liability from common law...
Recent cases have shown that federal preemption is a very powerfuldefense for a pharmaceutical or me...
Under the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 (MDA), Congress established a complex scheme for regulat...
Perhaps the most dramatic indication that the courts have shifted attitudes on health and safety mat...
This symposium was convened to address the growing and seemingly conflicting jurisprudence governing...
A circuit split regarding the preemptive scope of the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 (MDA) has wi...
This comment discusses the Medical Device Amendments of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and...
I start with a brief history of the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 and explain why that history d...
The U.S. Supreme Court’s important ruling in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co., Inc. v. Bartlett concerns wh...
The 21st Century Cures Act introduced innovative changes to the Food and Drug Administration’s regul...
The paper aims to provide an overview of the potential liability of a manufacturer or distributor or...
Medical device preemption is highly controversial because it provides medical device companies with ...
Federal agencies now regulate the manufacture, design, and labeling of hundreds of consumer products...
The Supreme Court\u27s decision in Riegel v. Medtronic immunized medical device manufacturers from c...