Drug and Device Preemption

Expert Witness & Scientific Evidence Summit

Monday, July 14, 2008

About

After preemption, Daubert provides the next strongest weapon in the defense counsel’s arsenal. Expert testimony and scientific evidence are the cornerstone of every products liability case. Although judges in both state and federal courts still struggle with their gate keeping function under the Daubert (or equivalent) standard, if you can effectively prove the qualifications of your expert, as well as demonstrate the reliability of that opinion as it applies to the facts of your case, you can save your client thousands, even millions of dollars in litigation costs, reputational damage, and lost revenue. Jurisdictional standards vary and the stakes are high: the pressure is on you to dispel litigation as early on as possible. Learn from the experts who have litigated the drug and device industry’s most high-stakes and high-publicity litigation in recent years, as they discuss with you strategies for effectively challenging the plaintiff’s expert to defeat your opponent’s case before it starts.

Contents & Contributors

About

After preemption, Daubert provides the next strongest weapon in the defense counsel’s arsenal. Expert testimony and scientific evidence are the cornerstone of every products liability case. Although judges in both state and federal courts still struggle with their gate keeping function under the Daubert (or equivalent) standard, if you can effectively prove the qualifications of your expert, as well as demonstrate the reliability of that opinion as it applies to the facts of your case, you can save your client thousands, even millions of dollars in litigation costs, reputational damage, and lost revenue. Jurisdictional standards vary and the stakes are high: the pressure is on you to dispel litigation as early on as possible. Learn from the experts who have litigated the drug and device industry’s most high-stakes and high-publicity litigation in recent years, as they discuss with you strategies for effectively challenging the plaintiff’s expert to defeat your opponent’s case before it starts.

Contents & Contributors

THE PREEMPTION DEFENSE FOR MEDICAL DEVICES AFTER RIEGEL V. MEDTRONIC
David M. Gossett, Mayer Brown LLP (Washington, DC)

RIEGEL V. MEDTRONIC: A CASE STUDY
David G. Martin, Medtronic, Inc. (Minneapolis, MN)

THE PREEMPTION DEFENSE FOR MEDICAL DEVICES AFTER RIEGEL V. MEDTRONIC
Daniel E. Troy, Sidley Austin LLP (Washington, DC)

DEFENDING "FRAUD ON THE FDA" CLAIMS AND ALLEGATIONS IN THE WAKE OF WARNER-LAMBERT V. KENT
James Beck, Dechert LLP (Philadelphia, PA)

FRAUD ON THE FDA: THE FALLOUT FROM WARNER-LAMBERT V. KENT
David Klingsberg, Kaye Scholer LLP (New York, NY)

IMPLIED PREEMPTION - BRACING FOR POTENTIAL REFORM TO PHARMACEUTICAL PREEMPTION LAW
Paul W. Schmidt, Covington & Burling LLP (Washington, DC)

SECTION 314.70(C): LEVINE AND BEYOND
Bert W. Rein, Wiley Rein LLP (Washington, DC)

DRUG AND DEVICE PREEMPTION: COUNTERING PLAINTIFFS’ CBE ARGUMENT
Malcolm Wheeler, Wheeler Trigg Kennedy LLP (Denver, CO)

DRUG AND DEVICE PREEMPTION: COUNTERING PLAINTIFFS’ CBE ARGUMENT
Jennifer L. Saulino, Covington & Burling LLP (Washington, DC)

STRATEGICALLY DEVELOPING AND LITIGATING THE PREEMPTION DEFENSE
Eric G. Lasker, Spriggs & Hollingsworth (Washington, DC)
Chilton Davis Varner, King & Spalding (Atlanta, GA)

ASSERTING THE PREEMPTION DEFENSE IN NON-WARNING CASES
Julie Coletti, Bayer Corporation (Pittsburgh, PA)
Deborah M. Russell, McGuire Woods LLP (Richmond, VA)
Caryn M. Silverman, Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold LLP (New York, NY)

EXAMINING THE FDA’S CURRENT PREEMPTION GOALS AND PRIORITIES
Sheldon T. Bradshaw, Hunton & Williams LLP (Washington, DC) (former Chief Counsel, FDA)

CONTEMPLATING THE CONGRESSIONAL/POLITICAL RESPONSE TO DRUG AND DEVICE PREEMPTION
Scott M. Lassman, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP (Washington, DC)



DOCUMENT TYPES: PRESENTATIONS AVAILABLE: 0