Rhodia, Inc., Hess & Clark Division v. Food and Drug Administration
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
LEVENTHAL, Circuit Judge:
Rhodia, Inc., Hess & Clark Division (Rho-dia) sought to amend approved new animal drug applications (NADA’s) in effect for three products containing the active drug furazolidone so as to include new sources of supply of the bulk drug in addition to the one named in the original NADA’s. The Director of the Bureau of Veterinary Medicine of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) denied approval of Rhodia’s supplemental NADA’s. Finding the action arbitrary and capricious, we set aside the FDA order and remand for further proceedings.
I. BACKGROUND
Rhodia currently holds…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Udall v. TallmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Train v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Greater Boston Television Corp. v. Federal Communications CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1970
- United States v. Article of Drug . . . Bacto-UnidiskSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- United States v. Robert Louis Ammidown, United States of America v. Robert L. AmmidownCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1974
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Alliance Hippocratic Medicine v. FDACourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2023
- American Cyanamid Co. v. YoungCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1985
- American Cyanamid Company v. YoungCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1985