The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case to determine if the family of Mexican teenager who was killed by a Border Patrol agent firing into Mexico has a constitutional right to sue the agent in the United States.
The Supreme Court announced Tuesday it would hear the case for this term, which began earlier this month.
Steve Shadowen and Professor Michael Carrier's law review article, Product Hopping: A New Framework, offers a new legal framework that courts, government enforcers, plaintiffs, and manufacturers can employ to analyze the antitrust implications to branded drug manufacturers' product reformulations. The article was selected for publication in the 2016 Notre Dame Law Review.
Steve Shadowen will provide insight into topics concerning U.S. antitrust enforcement in the pharmaceutical industry, specifically focusing on recent legal developments concerning antitrust challenges to pay-for-delay patent settlements and product hopping.
U.S. Border Patrol agents had “an astonishing pattern” of shooting people who threw rocks at them under a vague use-of-force policy that led to the “highly predictable” death of a man along the U.S.-Mexico border in California, according to a law enforcement expert witness’ review of a fatal shooting.
In a report completed this week, a former Baltimore police commissioner and Justice Department official found a Border Patrol policy allowing agents to shoot their firearms based on the threat of a thrown object “highly suspect.”
“Virtually all thrown objects fail to meet the ‘Imminent Peril’ standard to justify use of deadly force, and in such circumstances, officers are trained to take evasive or defensive action, not escalate the encounter with gunfire,” Thomas Frazier wrote in his report,
Warner Chilcott will have to face claims it paid drugmakers to delay producing a generic version of its contraceptive Loestrin in multidistrict litigation after the First Circuit on Monday found that noncash settlements can be subject to antitrust scrutiny.