Medtech Insight is part of Pharma Intelligence UK Limited

This site is operated by Pharma Intelligence UK Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 13787459 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. The Pharma Intelligence group is owned by Caerus Topco S.à r.l. and all copyright resides with the group.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction

Consumer Groups Lobby To Reverse PMA Preemption

This article was originally published in The Gray Sheet

Executive Summary

Groups pushing for a legislative reversal of a Supreme Court decision protecting device makers from some personal injury suits are trying to put a human face on the issue

You may also be interested in...



Device Industry Groups Lobby Against Bill That Would End PMA Pre-emption

Device industry groups are working to persuade lawmakers that a Supreme Court decision protecting device makers from personal injury suits involving PMA-approved devices should stand

Device Industry Groups Lobby Against Bill That Would End PMA Pre-emption

Device industry groups are working to persuade lawmakers that a Supreme Court decision protecting device makers from personal injury suits involving PMA-approved devices should stand

Anti-preemption bill resurfaces

Congressional Democrats reintroduced legislation March 5 to reverse last year's U.S. Supreme Court Riegel v. Medtronic decision, which bars, in most cases, state personal injury suits involving PMA-approved devices. The move by Reps. Frank Pallone, Jr., D-NJ, and Henry A. Waxman, D-Calif., and Sens. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., immediately followed the high-profile March 4 Wyeth v. Levine Supreme Court decision striking down federal pre-emption of lawsuits against drug makers for failing to properly warn the public of product risks. The Medical Device Safety Act of 2009 would revise language in the 1976 Medical Device Amendments that the high court says expressly pre-empts suits against PMA-approved devices. There is no such language in FDA drug oversight statutes, so the Wyeth decision does not create precedent for device suits. Still, says Waxman, in Wyeth, "the Court noted that these lawsuits 'uncover unknown drug hazards and provide incentives for drug manufacturers to disclose safety risks promptly.' The same is true for medical devices." The legislation was introduced for the first time last year, but it is more likely to be signed by a President Obama than a President Bush ("1The Gray Sheet" March 24, 2008, p. 19)

Related Content

Topics

Latest Headlines
See All
UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

MT027285

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel