The Tenth Circuit recently upheld a Utah district court’s finding that a branded drug manufacturer could not be held liable for failing to warn consumers about alleged birth defect risks when the FDA had previously rejected a citizen’s petition calling for the same warnings.

There has been a lot said already about the effect on product liability (especially drug) cases and “mass actions” as a result of the United States Supreme Court’s June 17, 2017 decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California , No. 16-466.

Introduction. Yesterday, on June 12, 2017, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Microsoft Corp. v. Baker et al. , a closely watched case in the class action world, and one on which we previously reported here. Baker presented the following question: Can a

The Big Picture: On Tuesday, Judge Koh granted Kellogg’s Motion to Dismiss in its entirety in Hadley v. Kellogg Sales Company , No. 5:16-cv-04955-LHK (N.D. Cal.). Hadley is one of three cases [1] against well-known cereal makers pending in the Northern District of California.