Search for: "United States v. Buckman" Results 41 - 60 of 124
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Dec 2006, 4:08 am
See Brief For United States As Amicus Curiae, Buckman Co. v. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 5:00 am by Bexis
Medtronic, Inc., 552 U.S. 312 (2008), and – depending on the allegation – maybe implied preemption under Buckman Co. v. [read post]
18 Oct 2011, 12:09 pm by Sean Wajert
Jim was recognized for, among other things, having written 50+ amicus briefs on PLAC's behalf, more than anyone else in the history of the organization; his lengthy service on PLAC's amicus committee; his role in the landmark Buckman v. [read post]
26 Jun 2008, 6:31 pm
"[A]ll such proceedings for the enforcement, or to restrain violations of this chapter shall be by and in the name of the United States. [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 11:36 am by Bexis
Smith-Kline Beecham Corp., 658 N.W.2d 127, 130-31 (Mich. 2003).Following Buckman Co. v. [read post]
10 Apr 2014, 11:58 am
United Service Automobile Association, 742 A.2d 1101, 1108 (Pa. [read post]
20 May 2013, 7:02 am by FDABlog HPM
”  In Buckman, the Supreme Court ruled that federal law impliedly preempted state “fraud-on-the-FDA” claims. [read post]
6 Nov 2008, 8:45 pm
We've had a chance now to read - no, make that "study" - the Wyeth v. [read post]
15 Feb 2007, 12:25 am
United States, 649 A.2d 301, 308 (D.C. 1994); Carson v. [read post]
12 Feb 2014, 9:24 am
“[A]ll such proceedings for the enforcement, or to restrain violations, of this chapter shall be by and in the name of the United States. [read post]
15 Apr 2010, 9:20 am by Bexis
Buckman, 531 U.S. at 349 n. 4.The Supreme Court made clear in Buckman that this section also limits the ability of a private plaintiff to pursue claims under state law theories where such claims collide with the exclusive enforcement power of the federal government.  [read post]