Medical device sales representatives are many things. They know their product lines inside and out. They can tell a surgeon exactly where to find a particular screw, rod, or connector in a tray containing dozens of components. They can help ensure the requested hardware is available when needed. What they cannot do is scrub in,
Reed Smith LLP
At Reed Smith, we believe that the practice of law has the ability to drive progress. We know your time is valuable and your matters are important. We are focused on outcomes, are highly collaborative, and have deep industry insight that, when coupled with our local market knowledge, allows us to anticipate and address your needs. You deserve purposeful, highly engaged client service that drives progress for your business.
Latest from Reed Smith LLP - Page 2
One Headcount To Learned Intermediary Rule Them All – Part 3
Here at the Blog, we love the learned intermediary rule. We’ve chronicled the rule’s steady expansion as it now has precedential support in all fifty states. “Every state in the country, along with the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, has adopted the learned intermediary doctrine in some iteration.” Dearinger v. Eli Lilly & Co.,…
Georgia Court Not In The Mood For Strict Liability Against A Product “Seller”
Is there a difference between a product manufacturer and a product seller when it comes to product liability? There is in Georgia, and the Georgia Court of Appeals’ recent opinion in Taylor v. Mood Rite, LLC, 2026 Ga. App. LEXIS 240 (Ga. Ct. App. May 15, 2026), underscores that point. An entity that merely packages…
Pleading Around Obvious Defenses
The now well-known requirement from the TwIqbal cases that a complaint contains factual allegations that establish that relief is plausible derives from Rule 8(a)(2) requirement that each pleading contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” One recurring point of contention in drug and device litigation…
S.D. Ohio Dismisses Device Case for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction
Whenever defense hacks get together, the conversation inevitably turns to horror stories about hostile jurisdictions. There is another word for those jurisdictions, and you know it well. We’ll mangle a phrase from the poet William Blake and call those jurisdictions satanic litigation mills. There’s a chance we’re headed for such a place soon, a place…
One Headcount To Learned Intermediary Rule Them All – Part 2
Here at the Blog, we love the learned intermediary rule. We’ve chronicled the rule’s steady expansion as it now has precedential support in all fifty states. “Every state in the country, along with the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, has adopted the learned intermediary doctrine in some iteration.” Dearinger v. Eli Lilly & Co.,…
Fraudulent Joinder and Some Easy Living in the Middle District of Georgia
Sometimes we read a decision in favor of the defense that makes it seem like getting the good result was easy. The court summarily disposes of plaintiff’s arguments, adopts the defendant’s reasoning, and might throw in a comment or two about things the plaintiff could have done—but didn’t. But getting those good results is almost…
Off-Label Prescribing Is Not A Crime
Today’s post is about one of our favorite topics, off-label use. This time, it isn’t about what manufacturers can say about unapproved uses. It’s about whether the DOJ can wield the FDCA’s misbranding provisions to criminally investigate hospitals whose physicians prescribe FDA-approved drugs for off-label purposes.
In In re Administrative Subpoena 25-1431-032 to Rhode…
It Is Indeed Time To Reconsider Federal Officer Removal
Back in 2020, we published a post, “Is It Time To Reconsider Federal Officer Removal?” It discussed a Fifth Circuit asbestos case, Latiolais v. Huntington Ingalls, Inc., 951 F.3d 286 (5th Cir. 2020), overruled prior precedent in light of a congressional amendment to the federal officer removal statute, 28 U.S.C. §1442(a), that broadened…
“Shall Not Be Used” Means Shall Not Be Used
The court in In re Acetaminophen—ASD-ADHD Products Liability Litigation confronted a problem that should not have existed in the first place–plaintiffs’ co-lead counsel violating confidentiality and coordination orders that he had helped negotiate.
The underlying orders were straightforward. The MDL confidentiality order protected confidential and highly confidential information produced in the litigation and prohibited the…