The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia March 31 vacated a Health Resources and Services Administration policy instituted in 2013 that restricted how certain 340B hospitals could make initial drug purchases. The case challenged a provision in the rule involving group purchasing organizations, known as the “GPO prohibition,” which bars disproportionate share hospitals from simultaneously buying outpatient drugs through the 340B Drug Pricing Program and a GPO. Although the court set aside the existing GPO prohibition as unlawful, it sent the question back to the agency for reconsideration. “In that process,” the court explained, "HRSA may adopt the same bottom-line view of the statute it did in the 2013 Policy, as long as the agency adheres to the APA [Administrative Procedures Act] and does not exceed its limited rulemaking authority over the Section 340B Program.”

Headline
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit March 31 upheld a preliminary injunction issued by the U.S. District Court for the District of West Virginia…
Headline
 The AHA March 3 urged the Health Resources and Services Administration to take immediate action to stop a new Novo Nordisk policy from taking effect…
Headline
The Health Resources and Services Administration Feb. 25 said it will extend the deadline to April 20 to receive comments on its request for information on…
Headline
The U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii Feb. 23 denied a preliminary injunction requested by AstraZeneca in a case challenging the state’s law…
Headline
The AHA, joined by several other national groups representing 340B hospitals, Feb. 19 urged the Health Resources and Services Administration to extend the…
Headline
The Minnesota Court of Appeals Feb. 17 affirmed a lower court decision in ruling that the state’s 340B contract pharmacy law is not preempted by federal law.…