![](http://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/398/2023/02/Sanofi-767x633.jpg)
SCOTUS Bound? After Appellate Ruling, What's Next in 340B Drug Discount Cases?
The statutory question at the center of the appeals could create a circuit split that brings the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court, said one court watcher.
February 10, 2023 at 12:20 PM
7 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
What You Need to Know
- The Third Circuit was the first federal appeals court to weigh in on 340B drug discount dispute.
- Legal experts say the ruling showed more significant alignment among judges on the issue.
- Whether a circuit split will bring the case to the Supreme Court is up in the air.
Legal experts say federal judges are significantly aligned after a first-of-its-kind appellate ruling backing drugmakers' policies on the government's 340B drug discount program, but there's less consensus on whether other appeals courts will follow suit.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit was the first appeals court to weigh in on a dispute over the program that requires manufacturers to deliver discounted drugs to certain hospitals that serve low-income patients. The panel sided with manufacturers who argued an Obamacare amendment doesn't require they supply lower-priced medications to an unlimited number of contract pharmacies.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All![Dissenter Blasts 4th Circuit Majority Decision Upholding Meta's Section 230 Defense Dissenter Blasts 4th Circuit Majority Decision Upholding Meta's Section 230 Defense](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/nationallawjournal/contrib/content/uploads/sites/398/2022/05/Allison-Jones-Rushing-2021-006-767x633.jpg)
Dissenter Blasts 4th Circuit Majority Decision Upholding Meta's Section 230 Defense
5 minute read![State Appellate Court Settles Fee Battle Between Former Co-Counsel in Patent Litigation State Appellate Court Settles Fee Battle Between Former Co-Counsel in Patent Litigation](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/402/2023/11/Fee-Dispute-767x633.jpg)
State Appellate Court Settles Fee Battle Between Former Co-Counsel in Patent Litigation
5 minute read![Justified Termination Does Not Bar Associate Attorney From Unemployment Benefits, State Appellate Court Rules Justified Termination Does Not Bar Associate Attorney From Unemployment Benefits, State Appellate Court Rules](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/414/2024/03/Gavel-and-Justice-Scales.jpeg-image767x633cropped.jpg)
Justified Termination Does Not Bar Associate Attorney From Unemployment Benefits, State Appellate Court Rules
5 minute read![TikTok Opts Not to Take Section 230 Immunity Fight to U.S. Supreme Court TikTok Opts Not to Take Section 230 Immunity Fight to U.S. Supreme Court](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/thelegalintelligencer/contrib/content/uploads/sites/292/2022/04/TikTok-App-13-767x633-1.jpg)
TikTok Opts Not to Take Section 230 Immunity Fight to U.S. Supreme Court
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1How Alzheimer’s and Other Cognitive Diseases Affect Guardianship, POAs and Estate Planning
- 2How Lower Courts Are Interpreting Justices' Decision in 'Muldrow v. City of St. Louis'
- 3Phantom Income/Retained Earnings and the Potential for Inflated Support
- 4Should a Financially Dependent Child Who Rejects One Parent Still Be Emancipated?
- 5Advising Clients on Special Needs Trusts
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250