1 / 59

Food and Drug Law December 6 , 2010

Food and Drug Law December 6 , 2010. Ralph F. Hall. Overview. Current events Review session Room 35 Enforcement Conclusion. Enforcement. Enforcement. Interstate commerce requirement Jurisdictional requirement Constitutional basis for jurisdiction

arch
Download Presentation

Food and Drug Law December 6 , 2010

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Food and Drug LawDecember 6, 2010 Ralph F. Hall

  2. Overview • Current events • Review session • Room 35 • Enforcement • Conclusion

  3. Enforcement

  4. Enforcement • Interstate commerce requirement • Jurisdictional requirement • Constitutional basis for jurisdiction • Generally three approaches to enforcement • Prohibited acts (§331) • Adulterated products • Misbranded products • Specific FDCA provisions • §355 (a) – no introduction of a new drug into interstate commerce without an approval • General statutory requirements and provisions • False statements, wire fraud, conspiracy, etc. • Remember Buckman and §337

  5. Enforcement Chain (§331) Adulteration Prohibited Act Misbranding Criminal Civil Administrative §331 “A&M Plus” §§332-334, other FDCA Provisions

  6. Prohibited Acts • Based on adulteration and misbranding concepts • Covers multiple parts of the distribution process • Introduction into interstate commerce - §331(a) • Receipt in interstate commerce §331 (c) • Linkage of adulteration/misbranding provisions to §331 • §§351, 352, 342, 343, 361, 362

  7. Prohibited Acts • Other specific actions under §331 • Refusal to permit access to records • Refusal to permit inspections • Movement of a detained device • Improper drug importation (§ 384 linkage) • Failure to register • Forging certain labels, marks, etc. • Fraudulent drugs • Defining specific acts as rendering products “misbranded”

  8. Linkage to Substantive Provisions • §331 linked to penalty provisions • §332-334 • Liberal construction • Role of general or common law remedies • Equitable powers • RX Depot & Lane Labs • Linked to penalty provisions • General civil and criminal provisions • triggers general penalty provisions

  9. Equitable Powers • § 332 – “district courts … shall have jurisdiction … to restrain violations of [§331] • “restrain violations” means future conduct • Does FDA have authority to utilize equitable remedial powers? • Lane Labs/RX Depot • FDA wanted to compel restitution and disgorgement of profits • Defendants argued limited powers under §332 • Courts held that once any equitable power is granted, all equitable powers are granted

  10. Other Relevant Provisions • False Statements (18 USC §1001) • Material misstatements • Intent • Oral or written statements • Completeness • Mail/wire fraud (18USC §1341) • Broad interpretation • False Claims Act (31 USC §3729) • HHS fraud and abuse provisions

  11. Other General Criminal Provisions • Conspiracy • Aiding and abetting • Tax issues • Money laundering • Obstruction of justice • SEC violations

  12. Biologics • 42 USC § 262 • List of “illegal” acts • Shipping unapproved product • False label • §262 (f) penalties • Linkage to general FDCA provisions (§262(j)) • General enforcement provisions

  13. Specific FDCA Provisions • Certain provisions include specific prohibitions • §355(a) • Difference between enforcement actions and challenges to agency actions • Appealing final agency decisions • Arbitrary and capricious standard • Role of Chevron/Bacto-Unidisk • Some specific procedures • §348(f) • Enforcement • Government burden • Judicial deference

  14. Obligation to Enforce • Prosecutorial discretion • Great latitude • Focus on high risk and high impact cases • Creating examples • § 336 • FDCA doesn’t require government to prosecute minor violations if the public interest is served by a warning or written notice • Lethal injection cases • No obligation to enforce

  15. Sources of Enforcement Information • Reports to FDA • Inspections • Routine • Required inspections (pre NDA/PMA) • For cause • Whistleblowers • Other companies • Public pressure

  16. Responsible Party • Corporate entity • Parent • Involved individuals • Authority and responsibility • Knowledge • Role of lawyers? • Role of compliance officers • Responsible corporate executives • CEO/president

  17. FDA Trends Typical Establishment Inspections: District Decisions

  18. FDA Trends Consequences of a Medical Device Inspection

  19. Enforcement Actions • Administrative actions • Inspections • 483 observations • Warning letter • Recalls • Seizures/detention/condemnation • Injunction • Consent decree • Debarment/delisting • Civil penalty actions • Corporate Integrity Agreements/Probation terms • Criminal actions • Misdemeanor • felony

  20. Recalls • Recalls are not enforcement • Recall as a remedy for violations • 21 CFR Part 7 – “Violative” products • Limited recall authority • Most recalls are “voluntary” • Failure to conduct a recall can lead to more formal actions • Seizure or detention • Reporting and corrective action obligations

  21. 483s • Issued at inspection • List of deviations • Little or no FDA management involvement • Not binding on FDA • Other issues can be added • Additional enforcement action possible • Three ratings (NAI, VAI, OAI) • Response to FDA addressing corrective actions • Admissions against interest?

  22. Warning Letters • Addressed to CEO/President • Reviewed by district, center and Chief Counsel office prior to issuance • 3-6 month process • Often follow 483 observations • Often state that the product is “adulterated” or “misbranded” • Impact on shipments • Impact on approvals • Impact on exports • Requires response and corrective action • Follow up inspection

  23. Civil Enforcement • Can be linked to criminal action • Same prosecutorial discretion • Purpose of criminal enforcement • Punishment • Deterrence • Entity/individual focus • Purpose of civil enforcement • Restitution/disgorgement • Remedial actions • Either entity or product directed • Equitable competition

  24. Injunction • Statutory authority • § 332 • Linkage to § 331 • Enjoin violations • Ongoing jurisdiction of court • Two basis for further action • Violate injunction • Violation of act • Remedies • Contempt • Other enforcement actions

  25. Equitable Relief • Availability of non-injunctive equitable remedies • Is §332 self limiting to injunctions • Congress defined the remedy as “injunction” • Restitution • Lane Labs • Disgorgement • RX Depot • Factors

  26. Seizure/Condemnation21 USC § 334 • Seizure of foods, drugs & cosmetics • Can precede actual interstate shipment • In rem action • Use of admiralty law procedures • Owner/claimant can challenge seizure • Right to trial by jury • Articles can be condemned • Destroyed or sold into legal distribution channel • 2006 Glaxo seizure • Multiple locations • GMP issues • Specific detention provision for devices and food

  27. Debarment/delisting • Debarment prohibits corporation or person from variety of FDA related activities • Variety of sources for debarment and delisting • FDCA • HHS • Types of activities covered • Providing services to FDA regulated company • Serving as clinical investigators • Obtaining Medicare/Medicaid payments as reimbursement for services or products

  28. Miscellaneous Penalties • Application Integrity Program (AIP) • Used in cases of scientific fraud or data integrity issues • Requires special data and process review before application process even starts • Import/Export bans • Application holds • Informal actions and delays • Publicity (§375)

  29. Civil Penalty Actions§333(f) • Applicable to devices and food • Covers a person “who violates a requirement of this act” • $15,000 per violation/$1,000,000 max for devices • Minor violation exception • Does not require a court action • Administrative action • Right to a hearing • Judicial review possible

  30. Consent Decrees • Agreed upon settlements • Involve FDA, DOJ and AUSA • Entered by court (i.e. a court order) • §332 provides jurisdiction and venue • Injunctive action often filed simultaneously • Generally local federal court • Require specific actions • Remedial actions • Periodic reports • Product actions • Can be very specific

  31. Consent Decrees • Typical provisions • Statement of jurisdiction and venue • Statement/admission of violations • Specific remedial actions • Revising procedures • Updated training • Time lines for actions • Reporting obligations • Third party certification

  32. Consent Decrees • Responsible parties • Corporate entity • At least 1 senior executive signs and is personally responsible • Penalties • Contempt and other standard remedies for breach of a court order • Stipulated penalties • Per day penalties for late actions • Portions of revenue • Cost of enforcement action

  33. Criminal Enforcement • Office of Criminal Investigations (OCI) • Ex FBI and Secret Service agents • Part of FDA • FDA • Chief Counsel’s Office • Other management representatives • FBI and other law enforcement agencies • Department of Justice • Office of Consumer Litigation • OIG • US Attorney’s Office • State agencies

  34. Criminal EnforcementProcess • Initial investigation • Covert or overt • Whistleblowers • Interview individuals • Documents • Grand jury process • Sub poenas for people or documents • Witness, subject or target • Multiple counsel • CIDs or other discovery mechanisms • Information/Indictment • Plea or trial

  35. Criminal Enforcement • Vast majority of corporate defendants plead guilty if indicted • Some individuals will go to trial • TAP, C.R. Bard • Sometimes defense wins • Penalties based on statutory requirements and Federal Sentencing Guidelines • Imprisonment • Fines • Disgorgement of profits • Other administrative actions

  36. Criminal Enforcement21 USC § 333 • Criminal penalties (§333(a) & (b)) • Misdemeanor • Felony • Intent to defraud • Not a financial limitation • “Defrauding” the government by false filings • Reimbursement linkage • Good faith exception • Can apply to receipt of adulterated/misbranded articles • Protect distribution chain and non-responsible parties

  37. Park/Dotterwiech • Two Supreme Court cases • 1943 and 1975 • Park • Park was president of Acme Markets • 36,000 employees • 874 stores • FDA inspection revealed adulterated product • Prior inspection also found issues • Acme pled guilty to 5 counts • Park pled not guilty

  38. Park • Acme had typical organization with delegated responsibility • Park’s defense • No personal knowledge of problems • Had instructed those responsible to fix problems • No mens rea • Court found strict criminal liability (misdemeanor) • Strict liability advanced purposes of FDCA • Highest standard of care required

  39. Exclusion • “individuals and entities may, or in some cases must, be excluded from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and all other Federal health care programs.” 42 CFR 1001 • In addition to other penalties • Mandatory exclusion • Patient abuse • Controlled substances • Theft, embezzlement, etc from FHCP • Permissive exclusion • False claims • Defined process for implementation • “Nuclear bomb” for companies • SEC/disclosure issues

  40. False Claims • Based upon 31 USC § 3729 • Covers much more than FDCA, HHS, etc. • Elements of violation • Intent • Presents or causes to be presented a false record or statement • To get paid by government • Other provisions • With intent to defraud, providing a document to government without completely knowing that it is true • Conspiracy

  41. False Claims • Linkage of FDA to Medicare/Medicaid • Significant portion of health care costs paid by government • 75% + of all Rx drugs • Shipping an adulterated/misbranded product violates FDA rules • Government shouldn’t pay for violative products • Hospital/physician (HCP) unknowing link in reimbursement chain • Company induces HCP to submit claim for violative product

  42. False Claims • Intent • Actual knowledge • Deliberate ignorance • Reckless disregard • Penalties • Up to $10,000 • Treble damages • Cost of actions • Reduction in damages (2X rather than 3X) for self reporting and cooperation

  43. False Claims • Relationship to FDA matters • How is a GMP violation, promotional violation or a failure to get an approval a “false claim”? • Off-label promotion as a false claim • FCA covers improper attempts to get money from US • How does an FDA violation become an attempt to take money from the government? • Company doesn’t submit claims to government for money

  44. Qui Tam Actions • Based on 31 USC § 3730 • Action brought by private person (relator) • Relates to false claims (§ 3729) • Action brought in name of US • Relator has exclusive rights • Private Attorney General concept • Prior notice to US and opportunity for US to take case • Served and filed under seal or in camera • If US takes case, relator has limited rights • If not, private person prosecutes actions

  45. Qui Tam Actions • Awards to relators • If US takes case – • 15-25% of award if information from relator is primary basis for recovery • Otherwise, up to 10% • If relator prosecutes case – • Relator receives 25-30% of award • Anti retaliation provision

  46. Sample Qui Tam Actions • TAP • Two relators • Tufts medical Center – approximately $90 million • Individual -$15-20 million • Park Davis • Relator was in-house medical officer • Received about $27 million • Glaxo • GMP case • Relator was ex-quality person • Relator collected over $96 million

  47. Corporate Integrity Agreement • Parties to Agreement • Company • HHS/OIG • Role of HHS/OIG • Medicare/Medicaid compliance • 5 year term • Is this a type of probation? • Designed to force and ensure compliance and the existence of a compliance program

  48. Corporate Integrity Agreement • Compliance office & code of conduct • Relevant policies and procedures • Periodic review of policies and procedures • Training requirement • MDR reporting • CAPA system • Independent Review Organization • Disclosure program • Non retaliation • Obligation to investigate

  49. Corporate Integrity Agreement • Ineligible person program • Linked to debarment/delisting program • Screening requirement • Reporting Obligations • Certain non-conformances • Periodic, routine reports • Compliance Officer certification • Risks? • Stipulated penalties • Potential exclusion

  50. Deferred Prosecution Agreements • Agreement not to prosecute if remedial actions completed • Information/indictment filed • Action stayed • Similar terms to CIAs • Corporate monitor often required • Failure to comply • Action restated • Breach of DPA • Non-prosecution Agreements (NPAs)

More Related