Canada Joins the Gene Patenting Debate

Canada Joins the Gene Patenting Debate

Canada has joined the gene patenting debate. Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario (“Children’s”) sued the University of Utah Research Foundation, Genzyme Genetics, and Yale University (“Defendants”) in Canada’s Federal Court asserting that 5 patents assigned to Defendants (collectively the “Long QT Patents”) for compositions and methods useful in the diagnosis and/or assessment of Long QT syndrome (“Long QT”) in human patients are invalid and/or unenforceable.

D.C. Circuit Upholds Contraceptive Coverage Mandate

By | Health Law & Policy Matters | November 20, 2014

Last week, a unanimous three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit upheld the religious accommodation to the Affordable Care Act’s (“ACA”) contraceptive coverage mandate (Priests for Life v. HHS, D.C. Cir. No. 13-5368, Nov. 14, 2014).  The court held that the accommodation set out by the Department of Labor (“DOL”) and Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) is a simple solution that does not impose a burden for purposes of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (“RFRA”).

Vascular Solutions Inc. and Its CEO Face Criminal Charges for Selling Unapproved Medical Devices

Last week, the Civil Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed an indictment charging Vascular Solutions Inc. (VSI) and its CEO Howard Root with (1) selling medical devices without the approval of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA); and (2) conspiring to defraud the U.S. government by concealing their illegal activities.  This case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas.

Pharmacists and Health Professionals Beware: Indiana Court of Appeals Upholds $1.44 Million Jury Verdict Resulting from HIPAA Violation

By | Data Privacy Monitor | November 19, 2014
Pharmacists and Health Professionals Beware: Indiana Court of Appeals Upholds $1.44 Million Jury Verdict Resulting from HIPAA Violation

As previously reported, an Indiana jury awarded $1.44 million to a Walgreens customer based on allegations that the customer’s pharmacist accessed, reviewed and shared the customer’s prescription history with others who then used the information to intimidate and harass the customer.