Find this week’s updates on 340B litigation to help you stay in the know on how 340B cases are developing across the country. Each week we comb through the dockets of more than 50 340B cases to provide you with a quick summary of relevant updates from the prior week in this industry-shaping body of litigation. 

Issues at Stake: Antitrust; Contract Pharmacy; HRSA Audit Process; Rebate Model

• In an antitrust class action case, the court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
• In an appealed case challenging a proposed state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, a group of amici filed an amicus brief in support of appellees.
• In an appealed case challenging a proposed state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, defendants-appellants filed an opening brief.
• In a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case, the plaintiff filed a reply in support of its motion to strike the government’s motion for summary judgment.
• In one Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) audit process case, the plaintiff filed a supplemental brief in support of the plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction.
• A group of 340B covered entities filed a complaint against a group of commercial payors, alleging that the payors were in breach of their contracts by failing to pay the proper amounts for 340B-acquired drugs.
• In three cases challenging a proposed state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements in Missouri, the court denied in part and granted in part two separate motions to dismiss and denied plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction in a third case.
• In two cases against HRSA alleging that HRSA unlawfully refused to approve drug manufacturers’ proposed rebate models:
  1. In one such case, a group of amici filed an amicus brief in support of defendants.
  2. In one such case, a group of amici moved for leave to file an amicus brief in support of plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment.

Additional Authors: Kelsey Reinhardt and Nadine Tejadilla