Demahy v. Actavis Inc.
| Decision Date | 22 August 2011 |
| Docket Number | No. 08–31204.,08–31204. |
| Citation | 650 F.3d 1045 |
| Parties | Julie DEMAHY, Plaintiff–Appelleev.ACTAVIS, INC., Individually and as Successor in Interest of Purepac Pharmaceutical Company, Defendant–Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HEREKristine K. Sims, Brian Leonard Glorioso, Richard Alvin Tonry, II, Tonry, Brinson & Glorioso, L.L.C., Slidell, LA, Louis M. Bograd (argued), Center for Constitutional Litigation, P.C., Washington, DC, for Plaintiff–Appellee.Richard A. Dean (argued), Irene Childress Keyse–Walker, Kristen Lepke Mayer, Tucker Ellis & West, L.L.P., Cleveland, OH, Elizabeth Haecker Ryan, Lemle & Kelleher, L.L.P., New Orleans, LA, for Defendant–Appellant.Joseph Paul Thomas, Linda E. Maichl, Ulmer & Bernel, L.L.P., Cincinnati, OH, for Amicus Curiae.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
The Supreme Court having reversed the judgment of this Court and remanded this action for further proceedings in light of its opinion in PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing, ––– U.S. ––––, 131 S.Ct. 2567, 180 L.Ed.2d 580 (2011), we vacate the district court's order denying in part the motion to dismiss and remand for the entry of judgment in favor of the defendant-appellant, Actavis, Inc.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Demahy v. Schwarz Pharma, Inc.
...order denying in part the motion to dismiss, and it remanded for the entry of judgment in favor of Actavis. Demahy v. Actavis, Inc., 650 F.3d 1045, 1046 (5th Cir.2011). Accordingly, the district court granted “judgment in favor of Defendant, Actavis, Inc. and against Plaintiff, Julie Demahy......
-
Morris v. Pliva, Inc.
...which held state law claims against generic manufacturers of Reglan preempted by FDA regulations. See also Demahy v. Actavis, Inc., 650 F.3d 1045 (5th Cir.2011) (per curiam). Accordingly, we AFFIRM the dismissal of this suit.BACKGROUND Penny Morris took metoclopramide from early 2006 to Jul......
-
Morris v. PLIVA, Inc.
...which held state law claims against generic manufacturers of Reglan preempted by FDA regulations. See also Demahy v. Actavis, Inc., 650 F.3d 1045 (5th Cir. 2011) (per curiam). Accordingly, we AFFIRM the dismissal of this suit.BACKGROUND Penny Morris took metoclopramide from early 2006 to Ju......
-
Purvis v. Teva Pharm., USA, Inc.
...Administratively Close this case (doc. 25) until such time as the Supreme Court ruled on the motion for rehearing in Demahy v. Actavis, Inc., 650 F.3d 1045 (5th Cir.2011). On August 22, 2011 the Supreme Court denied Plaintiff's Motion for Rehearing in Actavis.Id. Subsequently, the prior ord......
-
Supreme Court Decision Alert - June 24, 2013
...2012); Mensing v. Wyeth, Inc., 658 F.3d 867 (8th Cir. 2011); Smith v. Wyeth, Inc., 657 F.3d 420 (6th Cir. 2011); Demahy v. Actavis, Inc., 650 F.3d 1045 (5th Cir. Bartlett is significant for the business community because it clarifies and reaffirms Mensing's holding that claims against a gen......