Changeflow GovPing Healthcare 340B Litigation Roundup - Contract Pharmacy Dis...
Routine Notice Added Final

340B Litigation Roundup - Contract Pharmacy Disputes

Favicon for www.jdsupra.com JD Supra Healthcare
Published
Detected
Email

Summary

McDermott Will & Emery published its weekly 340B litigation roundup covering March 24-30, 2026, summarizing developments across more than 50 pending cases involving the 340B drug pricing program. Drug manufacturers filed new suits challenging state contract pharmacy laws in Washington and pursued appeals in Tennessee cases, while four Utah cases advanced with plaintiffs responding to show cause orders.

What changed

Drug manufacturers continue pursuing multi-front litigation challenging state laws governing 340B contract pharmacy arrangements. In Washington, manufacturers filed two separate suits challenging the state's contract pharmacy law. In Tennessee, one plaintiff appealed a dismissal order while another case was dismissed and appealed after the court denied the preliminary injunction motion as moot. In Utah, four cases advanced as plaintiffs responded to court orders to show cause.

Healthcare entities participating in the 340B program, particularly those operating contract pharmacy arrangements, should monitor these cases for potential impacts on state-level protections. Contract pharmacy arrangements remain the primary litigation focus for manufacturers challenging 340B program requirements. No immediate compliance actions are required, but entities should review their contract pharmacy arrangements and stay informed of jurisdictional developments as these cases progress.

Archived snapshot

Apr 2, 2026

GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.

April 2, 2026

This Week in 340B: March 24 – March 30, 2026

Reuben Bank, Emily Jane Cook, Margaret Houtz, Kelsey Reinhardt McDermott Will & Schulte + Follow Contact LinkedIn Facebook X Send Embed

Find the week’s updates on 340B litigation to help you stay in the know on how 340B cases are developing across the country. Each week we comb through the dockets of more than 50 340B cases to provide you with a quick summary of relevant updates from the prior week in this industry-shaping body of litigation. Get more details on these 340B cases and all other material 340B cases pending in federal and state courts with the 340B Litigation Tracker.

Issues at Stake: Contract Pharmacy

  • Drug manufacturers filed two separate suits to challenge a Washington state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements.
  • In one case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Tennessee state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiff appealed the court’s order granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss.
  • In a second case brought by a drug manufacturer challenging a Tennessee state law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss, denied the plaintiff’s motion for preliminary Injunction as moot, and dismissed the case for failure to state a claim, and the plaintiff filed an appeal.
  • In four cases brought by drug manufacturers challenging a Utah law governing contract pharmacy arrangements, the plaintiffs filed responses to the court’s order to show cause. [View source.]

Send Print Report

Related Posts

Latest Posts

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.
Attorney Advertising.

©
McDermott Will & Schulte

Written by:

McDermott Will & Schulte Contact + Follow Reuben Bank + Follow Emily Jane Cook + Follow Margaret Houtz + Follow Kelsey Reinhardt + Follow more less

PUBLISH YOUR CONTENT ON JD SUPRA

  • ✔ Increased readership
  • ✔ Actionable analytics
  • ✔ Ongoing writing guidance Join more than 70,000 authors publishing their insights on JD Supra

Start Publishing »

Published In:

Appeals + Follow Drug Pricing + Follow Manufacturers + Follow Motion to Dismiss + Follow Pending Litigation + Follow Pharmaceutical Industry + Follow Pharmacies + Follow Preliminary Injunctions + Follow Prescription Drugs + Follow Section 340B + Follow State and Local Government + Follow State Legislatures + Follow Health + Follow Science, Computers & Technology + Follow more less

McDermott Will & Schulte on:

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra: Sign Up Log in ** By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.* - hide - hide

Get daily alerts for JD Supra Healthcare

Daily digest delivered to your inbox.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

About this page

What is GovPing?

Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission

What's from the agency?

Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from McDermott.

What's AI-generated?

The plain-English summary, classification, and "what to do next" steps are AI-generated from the original text. Cite the source document, not the AI analysis.

Last updated

Classification

Agency
McDermott
Published
April 2nd, 2026
Instrument
Notice
Legal weight
Non-binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Minor

Who this affects

Applies to
Drug manufacturers Healthcare providers
Industry sector
3254 Pharmaceutical Manufacturing 6211 Healthcare Providers
Activity scope
Healthcare Pharmaceuticals
Geographic scope
United States US

Taxonomy

Primary area
Healthcare
Operational domain
Legal
Topics
Pharmaceuticals Healthcare

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when JD Supra Healthcare publishes new changes.

Optional. Personalizes your daily digest.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.