Legal Opinion
County of Santa Clara v. Astra USA, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided August 27, 2008No. 06-16471PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FISHER, Circuit Judge:
Certain federally funded medical clinics — so-called “Section 340B covered entities” — are able to purchase prescription drugs at a discount from drug manufacturers under a standardized agreement between the federal government and the drug companies. During 2003, for example, these covered entities spent $3.4 billion on outpatient prescription drugs. They claim in this lawsuit that they have been overcharged for those drugs in violation of pharmaceutical pricing agreements between the Secretary of Health and Human Services (“Secretary”) and the drug manufacturer…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Alexander v. SandovalSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Grable & Sons Metal Products, Inc. v. Darue Engineering & ManufacturingSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Middlesex County Sewerage Authority v. National Sea Clammers Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Empire Healthchoice Assurance, Inc. v. McVeighSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- County of Santa Clara v. Astra USA, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Lake Almanor Associates L.P. v. Huffman-Broadway Group, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2009
- N Group LLC v. Hawai'i County Liquor CommissionDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 2009
- County of Santa Clar v. Astra USA, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- County of Santa Clara v. Astra USA, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2009