On July 14, 2011, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a proposed rule to withdraw 21 CFR § 203.50(a). The original rule was first proposed on March 14, 1994, as part of the Prescription Drug Marketing Act amendments to the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. That proposed rule was finalized in December 1999 and included a pedigree requirement that would require an unauthorized distributor to include all prior sales, purchases or trades of the drug, starting with the manufacturer. Because of industry objections, implementation of the rule was delayed until June 14, 2006, with an effective date of December 1, 2006. On December 8, 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York preliminarily enjoined implementation of the rule. Subsequently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed that order.1 In essence, the district court and the appellate court accepted the argument that unauthorized distributors of record could not provide pedigree information all the way back to the manufacturer because authorized distributors of record were neither required nor unwilling to provide pedigree information for all transactions between the manufacturer and that particular authorized distributor of record, leaving a potential gap in the pedigree. The FDA is now proposing to withdraw § 203.50(a).
Following the withdrawal, however, unauthorized distributors should continue to comply with the pedigree requirements as set forth in the RxUSA injunction. FDA plans to exercise enforcement discretion and require, pursuant to § 503(e)(1)(A) of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, unauthorized distributors to provide pedigrees that:
- Include information regarding transactions going back to either the manufacturer or the last authorized distributor of record that handled the drugs; and
- Include the date of the transactions and the names and addresses of all the parties to the transaction.
In addition, FDA is encouraging wholesalers to include the drug, dosage, container size, number of containers, and lot or control numbers of the drug in the pedigree.
Footnote
1. HHS v. RxUSA Wholesale, Inc., 285 Fed. Appx. 809 (2d Cir. N.Y. 2008).
This article is for general information and does not include full legal analysis of the matters presented. It should not be construed or relied upon as legal advice or legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances. The description of the results of any specific case or transaction contained herein does not mean or suggest that similar results can or could be obtained in any other matter. Each legal matter should be considered to be unique and subject to varying results. The invitation to contact the authors or attorneys in our firm is not a solicitation to provide professional services and should not be construed as a statement as to any availability to perform legal services in any jurisdiction in which such attorney is not permitted to practice.
Duane Morris LLP, a full-service law firm with more than 700 attorneys in 24 offices in the United States and internationally, offers innovative solutions to the legal and business challenges presented by today's evolving global markets. Duane Morris LLP, a full-service law firm with more than 700 attorneys in 24 offices in the United States and internationally, offers innovative solutions to the legal and business challenges presented by today's evolving global markets. The Duane Morris Institute provides training workshops for HR professionals, in-house counsel, benefits administrators and senior managers.