<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Whistleblower Lawsuit Against J&#038;J Is Dismissed</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/whistleblower-lawsuit-against-jj-is-dismissed/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/whistleblower-lawsuit-against-jj-is-dismissed/</link>
	<description>News, Comment and Conversation</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:46:33 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Qui Tam Complaint against J&#38;J Subsidiary, Ortho Biotech, is Dismissed &#171; PharmaFraud</title>
		<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/whistleblower-lawsuit-against-jj-is-dismissed/#comment-128115</link>
		<dc:creator>Qui Tam Complaint against J&#38;J Subsidiary, Ortho Biotech, is Dismissed &#171; PharmaFraud</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 17:21:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/whistleblower-lawsuit-against-jj-is-dismissed/#comment-128115</guid>
		<description>[...] the Monday dismissal of a Qui Tam. The article which alerted me to this action is on Pharmalot, Whistleblower Lawsuit Against J&#38;J Is Dismissed. The whistleblower suit [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the Monday dismissal of a Qui Tam. The article which alerted me to this action is on Pharmalot, Whistleblower Lawsuit Against J&amp;J Is Dismissed. The whistleblower suit [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ol cranky</title>
		<link>http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/whistleblower-lawsuit-against-jj-is-dismissed/#comment-126558</link>
		<dc:creator>ol cranky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 02:12:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/whistleblower-lawsuit-against-jj-is-dismissed/#comment-126558</guid>
		<description>Well if they're going to make it more difficult under 9b and do so publicly, they're just encouraging this sort of activity and possibly emboldening companies to increase it. To make matters worse, the companies fear qui tam suits but not investigation into other significant complaints of non compliance (nobody in R &#38; D really expects an overburdened FDA to look into evidence of violations unrelated to a filing) so I expect the other violations will become increasingly egregious.  I hope the US District Court in Philadelphia and other pharma hotbeds are more pragmatic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well if they&#8217;re going to make it more difficult under 9b and do so publicly, they&#8217;re just encouraging this sort of activity and possibly emboldening companies to increase it. To make matters worse, the companies fear qui tam suits but not investigation into other significant complaints of non compliance (nobody in R &amp; D really expects an overburdened FDA to look into evidence of violations unrelated to a filing) so I expect the other violations will become increasingly egregious.  I hope the US District Court in Philadelphia and other pharma hotbeds are more pragmatic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.148 seconds -->

