Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Association for Accessible Medicines v. Frosh

United States District Court, D. Maryland

October 12, 2017

ASSOCIATION FOR ACCESSIBLE MEDICINES Plaintiff
v.
FROSH, et al. Defendants

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: ENTRY OF PARTIAL FINAL JUDGMENT AND INJUNCTION PENDING APPEAL

          MARVIN J. GARBIS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         The Court has before it Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Partial Final Judgment and for An Injunction Pending Appeal [ECF No. 46].

         The Court finds that a hearing is not necessary.

         I. BACKGROUND

         Plaintiffs have asserted claims for declaratory and injunctive relief challenging as unconstitutional Maryland's House Bill 631 (“HB 631”), which prohibits manufacturers and wholesale distributors from engaging in price-gouging in the sale of essential off-patent or generic drugs that are made available for sale in Maryland.

         The claims asserted are that:

1. The legislation violates the dormant Commerce Clause.
2. The legislation is unconstitutionally vague and therefore violates the Due Process Clause.
3. The Court should issue a preliminary injunction and permanent injunction preventing enforcement of the legislation.

         Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 29] and Plaintiff filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction [ECF No. 9]. In the Memorandum and Order Re: Motion to Dismiss and Preliminary Injunction [ECF No. 43], the Court granted Defendants' Motion to Dismiss as to the dormant Commerce Clause challenge but denied the motion as to the Due Process challenge. The Court also denied Plaintiff's request for a preliminary injunction.

         Plaintiff now requests an entry of a partial final judgment as to the dormant Commerce Clause cause of action and an injunction pending appeal. Defendants do not oppose the entry of the partial final judgment, but do oppose the injunction pending appeal.

         II. PARTIAL FINAL JUDGMENT UNDER RULE 54(b)

         Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides in pertinent part:

When an action presents more than one claim for relief . . . the court may direct entry of a final judgment as to one or more, but fewer than all, claims . . . only if the court expressly ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.