Mylan Knocks Out Failure-To-Warn Claims Despite Plaintiffs' Creative Mensing Argument


Can a generic drug maker be held liable for failure-to-warn claims because its version of a popular drug gained FDA recognition as the industry standard? Not according to a ruling last week by a federal judge in Atlanta, who ruled that labeling claims against Mylan over its version of an anti-seizure drug were preempted under the Supreme Court's Pliva v. Mensing decision.

This article has been archived, and is no longer available on this website.

View this content exclusively through LexisNexis® Here

Not a LexisNexis® Subscriber?

Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via® and Nexis®. This includes content from The National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Legaltech News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202537998298

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.