No. 19-1276

Michael B. White, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Darla K. White, Deceased v. Medtronic, Inc., et al.

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-05-12
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Tags: 21-usc-360 adulteration buckman diversity-of-jurisdiction fda-regulations medical-device-preemption off-label off-label-use pleading pleading-standard private-causes-of-action riegel state-court-jurisdiction summary-disposition
Latest Conference: 2020-09-29
Question Presented (from Petition)

1. Adulterated products are not a medical device, no preemption for FDA violations.

2. A doctor could not develop well-informed off-label use opinion based on false information created and disseminated by Medtronic.

3. Petitioner has private causes of action.

4. State court is the proper jurisdiction.

5. Michigan requirements are the proper pleading standard.

6. Summary disposition and failure to remand were improper.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals incorrectly affirmed the U.S. District Court's grant of summary disposition due to an incorrect application of federal medical device preemption law

Docket Entries

2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-06-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-04-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 11, 2020)

Attorneys

Michael White
Michael B. White — Petitioner