Dispute on eye drop size fails to catch Supreme Court's eye
Ethics
A dispute about the size of eye drops has failed to catch the eye of the Supreme Court.
Drug companies including Allergan, Bausch & Lomb, Merck and Pfizer had asked the court to get involved in the case. The companies were sued by patients using their eye drops to treat glaucoma and other eye conditions. The high court said Monday that it won't take the case. That means a lower-court decision allowing the lawsuit to go forward will stand.
The patients said that drug companies' bottles dispense drops that are too large, leaving wasted medication running down their faces. The patients said they would pay less for their treatment if their bottles were designed to dispense smaller drops.
Related listings
-
NJ Supreme Court Reverses Decades-Old Divorce Law
Ethics 08/10/2017The New Jersey Supreme Court has reversed a decades-old law in a landmark decision that makes the child the focus of divorce relocation proceedings. The law centers on divorced parents who want to leave New Jersey with the child against the other par...
-
Vietnamese activist sentenced to 9 years in prison
Ethics 07/22/2017A Vietnamese court on Tuesday sentenced an activist to nine years in prison on charges of producing videos that defamed the country’s leadership, in the latest crackdown on dissent. Tran Thi Nga was convicted of spreading propaganda against the state...
-
Supreme Court deadline nears for suit over wetland loss
Ethics 07/11/2017A Louisiana flood board is nearing a deadline for asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review its lawsuit seeking to make oil and gas companies pay for decades of damage to coastal wetlands. Federal district and appeals courts have rejected the lawsuit, ...
USCIS to Continue Implementing New Policy Memorandum on Notices to Appear
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is continuing to implement the June 28, 2018, Policy Memorandum (PM), Updated Guidance for the Referral of Cases and Issuance of Notices to Appear (NTAs) in Cases Involving Inadmissible and Deportable Aliens (PDF, 140 KB).
USCIS may issue NTAs as described below based on denials of I-914/I-914A, Application for T Nonimmigrant Status; I-918/I-918A, Petition for U Nonimmigrant Status; I-360, Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant (Violence Against Women Act self-petitions and Special Immigrant Juvenile Status petitions); I-730, Refugee/Asylee Relative Petitions when the beneficiary is present in the US; I-929, Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U-1 Nonimmigrant; and I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (with the underlying form types listed above).
If applicants, beneficiaries, or self-petitioners who are denied are no longer in a period of authorized stay and do not depart the United States, USCIS may issue an NTA. USCIS will continue to send denial letters for these applications and petitions to ensure adequate notice regarding period of authorized stay, checking travel compliance, or validating departure from the United States.