No. 23-1320
GlaxoSmithKline, LLC, et al. v. Superior Court of California, Alameda County
Amici (1)
Tags: can the consumer's home state assert specific per brand-name-manufacturer due-process generic-drug generic-drugs innovator-liability personal-jurisdiction preemption product-liability specific-jurisdiction warning-label-liability
Latest Conference:
2024-09-30
Question Presented (from Petition)
When a plaintiff alleges injury from the consumption of a generic drug, can the consumer's home state assert specific personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state brand-name manufacturer?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
When a plaintiff alleges injury from the consumption of a generic drug
Docket Entries
2024-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2024-08-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-07-18
Amicus brief of The Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America submitted.
2024-07-18
Brief amicus curiae of The Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America filed.
2024-06-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 18, 2024)
2024-03-13
Application (23A836) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until June 15, 2024.
2024-03-08
Application (23A836) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from April 16, 2024 to June 15, 2024, submitted to Justice Kagan.
Attorneys
GlaxoSmithKline, LLC, et al.
Jay Philip Lefkowitz — Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Petitioner
The Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America
Nicole A. Saharsky — Mayer Brown LLP, Amicus