Legal Opinion
Schering Corp. v. Shalala
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided June 15, 1993No. 92-5103PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Per curiam
Schering Corporation brings this appeal from the district court’s judgment sustaining the Food and Drug Administration’s view, expressed in 1990 in response to a citizen petition, that the agency is not limited to determining “bioequivalence” by applying the test set forth in 21 U.S.C. § 355(j)(7)(B). 782 F.Supp. 645. In light of the FDA’s promulgation in 1992 of regulations defining “bioequivalence,” we hold that the appeal is moot.
Schering manufactures and distributes pharmaceutical products. Two of Schering’s drugs, Lotrimin® and Proventil®, fall within the class of “non-systemically…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- County of Los Angeles v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission v. Holiday Tours, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1977
- Hall v. BealsSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Fort Stewart Schools v. Federal Labor Relations AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Princeton University v. SchmidSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Ass'n v. NicholsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1998
- Judicial Watch, Inc. v. National Energy Policy Development GroupDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2002
- James C. Robinson v. National Transportation Safety BoardCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1994
- Schering Corporation v. Food and Drug AdministrationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
- Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. ShalalaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1996
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.