Law Center Search Results

The NAM filed a brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to support manufacturers in a class action litigation suit brought by plaintiffs who did not allege physical injury or that the product was ineffective. Instead, the plaintiffs claimed that Alcon’s medicated eyedroppers caused financial harm because the eyedroppers dispensed more liquid than required for treatment. This argument could encourage speculative class action litigation challenging business practices that could be portrayed as potentially inefficient. The NAM’s brief argued that the plaintiffs’ claim is speculative and did not identify a recognizable harm. Unfortunately, the court did not agree with NAM’s argument and reversed the lower court’s dismissal.