Guarino v. Wyeth LLC
2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128630
M.D. Fla.2011Background
- This is a products liability case against Teva and other manufacturers of metoclopramide (Reglan).
- Plaintiff asserts negligence, negligence per se, strict liability, breach of express/implied warranties, and misrepresentation against Teva.
- Teva is a generic manufacturer; plaintiff sues over alleged inadequate warnings on the generic label.
- In Mensing, the Supreme Court held that federal law preempts state-law failure-to-warn claims for generic drugs.
- Teva moved to dismiss, arguing Mensing preempts plaintiff’s state-law claims; plaintiff responded; Teva replied.
- The court grants Teva’s motion, dismissing plaintiff’s claims with prejudice and directing termination of Teva as a party.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Mensing preempt state-law failure-to-warn claims against Teva? | Plaintiff argues state-law duties to warn are independent of federal constraints. | Mensing forecloses any state-law failure-to-warn claims for generics. | Yes; preempted and claims dismissed. |
| Do any other state-law claims survive Mensing? | Plaintiff contends non-warn-based theories may survive. | Mensing bars state-law claims involving generic drug labels/warnings entirely. | No; all state-law claims are preempted. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ferayorni v. Hyundai Motor Co., 711 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (warnings defect standard in Florida cases)
- Smith v. Wyeth, Inc., 657 F.3d 420 (6th Cir. 2011) (preemption of certain failure-to-warn claims in generic-drug context)
- Henderson v. Sun Pharm. Indus., Ltd., 809 F. Supp. 2d 1373 (N.D. Ga. 2011) (dismissal under preemption theories related to generics)