Legal Opinion
Seufert v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
District Court, S.D. California
Decided May 11, 2016No. Case No.: 13cv2169 AJB (MDD); Seufert: 13cv2169; Lara: 13cv2928; McDaniel: 13cv3191; Gaines: 14cv0056; Marble: 14cv0611; Stovall: 14cv1612; Heindl: 14cv1973; Blazer: 15cv1149; Gibson: 15cv1340; Deihl: 15cv1435; Copeland: 15cv1884; Matthews: 15cv2190; Elosegui: 15cv198PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Hon. Anthony J. Battaglia, United States District Judge
I. INTRODUCTION
On February 27, 2014, the FDA published the following in the New England Journal of Medicine'.
With approximately 25.8 million diabetic patients in the United States and 33 million in the European Union alone, the growing prevalence of diabetes worldwide poses a major public health challenge. Both the FDA and the European Medicines Agency are committed to en*1165suring the safety of the drugs marketed for the treatment of diabetes, and post-marketing reports of pancreatitis…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Hillsborough County v. Automated Medical Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- In Re Fosamax (Alendronate Sodium) Products Liability LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2017
- Rinder v. Merck Sharp & Dhome Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2019
- (PC) Caruso v. JohnsonDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2020
- Rinder v. Merck Sharp & Dhome Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2019