Update on medical foods

Midlothian Laboratories, L.L.C. v. Pamlab, L.L.C., 2007 WL 2702049 (M.D. Ala.)

Midlothian moved to reconsider the district court’s ruling that Pamlab’s false advertising counterclaim should go to trial. The earlier ruling was based on Midlothian’s claims that its product was a “generic” equivalent and “bioequivalent” to Pamlab’s medical food Foltx, when at least one test of Midlothian’s product revealed that only two of three of Foltx’s active ingredients were present. The parties informed the court that it was mistaken about the product on which that test had been run: it was Foltx. (Whoops.) As a result (and because Pamlab apparently had no other evidence of falsity, once its argument that the very terms “generic” and “bioequivalent” necessarily implied FDA-level substantiation was rejected), the court granted summary judgment for Midlothian.