Life Sciences
In Metz v. Wyeth LLC, case no. 8:10-cv-2658 (M.D. Fla.), plaintiff alleges she developed an irreversible involuntary movement disorder following ingestion of metoclopramide, a generic version of Reglan used to treat gastrointestinal motility disorders. On November 14, 2011, Defendant generic manufacturer Actavis Elizabeth LLC sought dismissal of plaintiff’s first amended complaint arguing that plaintiff’s claims were preempted under Pliva Inc. v. Mensing, 131 S. Ct. 2567 (2011). In Mensing, the U.S. Supreme Court held federal law preempts state law failure to warn claims against generic manufacturers because they have no ability to unilaterally change their label. In this case, plaintiff argued her claims survive Mensing because, rather than alleging Actavis had failed to warn by not changing its label, she alleges Actavis failed to study, monitor, and report the risks associated with its product in violation of the duty imposed by Florida law to take reasonable precautions to avoid reasonably foreseeable injuries. The court previously granted summary judgment for Wyeth LLC, manufacturer of brand-name Reglan, finding Wyeth owed no duty to the plaintiff because she did not consume its products. An order is pending and, if the court grants Actavis’ motion to dismiss, the plaintiff will be left without recourse against both the generic and brand-name manufacturers.
Reported By: Brian T. Guthrie