Novo Nordisk scores major legal win that bars many compounded versions of Wegovy, Ozempic
Novo Nordisk scored a huge legal victory that largely restricts compounding pharmacies from marketing or selling cheaper, unapproved versions of the drugmaker's blockbuster weight loss drug Wegovy and diabetes treatment Ozempic.
A federal judge in Texas late Thursday rejected a bid by compounding pharmacies to keep making copies of Ozempic and Wegovy while a legal challenge over the shortage of those drugs unfolds. That came in response to a February lawsuit from a compounding trade group against the Food and Drug Administration's determination that the active ingredient in those drugs, semaglutide, is no longer in shorter in the U.S.
Patients flocked to the cheaper copycats when Ozempic and Wegovy were in short supply over the last two years due to skyrocketing demand, or if they didn't have insurance coverage for the costly treatments.
During FDA-declared shortages, pharmacists can legally make compounded versions of brand-name medications. Many telehealth companies, such as Hims & Hers, also offered those copycats. But drugmakers and some health experts have pushed back against the practice because the FDA does not approve compounded drugs, which are essentially custom-made copies prescribed by a doctor to meet a specific patient's needs.
"We are pleased the court has rejected the compounders' attempts to undermine FDA's data-based decision that the shortage" of semaglutide is resolved, said Steve Benz, Novo Nordisk's corporate vice president, legal and U.S. general counsel, in a statement.
"Patient safety remains a top priority for Novo Nordisk and the extensive nationwide legal actions we have taken to protect Americans from the health risks posed by illegitimate 'semaglutide' drugs are working," he said, referring to the company's more than 100 lawsuits against compounding pharmacies and other entities across 32 states.
On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman specifically denied the Outsourcing Facilities Association's bid for a preliminary injunction that would have prevented the FDA from taking action against its members for making copies of semaglutide.
That decision upholds the FDA's previous determination that the semaglutide shortage in the U.S. is over and means the FDA can now immediately go after so-called 503A pharmacies that are making compounded versions of semaglutide according to individual prescriptions for a specific patient.
Those pharmacies are largely regulated by states rather than the FDA.
Those pharmacies make compounded drugs according to individual prescriptions for a specific patient and are largely regulated by states rather than the FDA.
The decision also means the FDA can start targeting federally regulated 503B pharmacies, which manufacture compounded drugs in bulk with or without prescriptions, after May 22. The agency's actions can include product seizures and warning letters to pharmacies.
The decision on Thursday follows another win for Novo Nordisk. A different federal judge in Texas earlier this week ruled in favor of the drugmaker against a 503A pharmacy, MediOak Pharmacy, permanently prohibiting the business from marketing or selling compounded semaglutide.
Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly have aggressively cracked down on compounding pharmacies over the last two years as they benefit from the soaring popularity of their weight loss and diabetes drugs.
Eli Lilly has gone through a similar legal process with tirzepatide, the active ingredient in its weight loss drug Zepbound and diabetes treatment Mounjaro. The FDA declared the U.S. shortage of tirzepatide over last year, prompting the same compounding trade group to sue the FDA over the drug.
In March, a federal judge denied the compounding group's request for a preliminary injunction on the FDA's enforcement against its members for making copies of Mounjaro and Zepbound. The compounding group has appealed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
In A Frozen Job Market, More People Are Locked In (Or Locked Out)
More workers are getting stuck in place in the job market, as hiring slows, quitting diminishes, and layoff rates stay low. Businesses are uncertain about the future of tariff policy, and many have put expansion plans on ice while they await clarity. Forecasters expect the job market to get tougher as the year goes on, with tariffs causing a rise in the unemployment it the "locked-in" job market: more people than usual are stuck in a job search or a job they don't want, and employers are similarly holding on to workers they may or may not the picture painted by recent data on the labor market, which shows that employers and employees alike have responded to uncertainty about tariffs by staying in place. The hiring rate has slacked off in recent months, far below post-pandemic levels. Fewer workers are quitting their jobs too, a sign that they're not confident in finding a better one. And layoffs remain near historic lows, showing employers are reluctant to let go of the workers they have. "Americans are sticking with their current hand rather than drawing new cards," Mischa Fisher, economist at online course site Udemy, wrote in a commentary last week about the most recent report on the job market from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. "We're seeing the labor market's version of the housing market's 'lock-in' effect,' where employees are too nervous to make moves. This freeze is blocking normal opportunity flow—early career workers can't break in, experienced workers can't move up, and burned-out employees stay put."In May, employers added 139,000 jobs, enough to prevent the unemployment rate from rising, but far from a hot labor market. "While the U.S. job market continued to add a decent number of jobs in May, it's notably cooler than it was even a few months ago, and continues to soften—to the point where there's not much room for further slowdown before unemployment meaningfully starts to rise," Cory Stahle, an economist at the hiring lab of job hunting site Indeed, wrote in a commentary. Behind the slowdown are President Donald Trump's tariffs imposed on U.S. trading partners earlier in the year. Trump has announced tariffs, then paused or changed them so many times that companies have been left guessing about what import taxes will be years or months ahead. That means many have put expansion plans on ice while they await clarity, according to recent surveys of business forecasters expect tariffs to start dragging down job growth and pushing up unemployment later in the year. The effects could be less if Trump strikes deals with trading the meantime, other forces are also dragging down the job market. High interest rates from the Federal Reserve, meant to curb inflation, are keeping business loans expensive, and the Trump administration's mass layoffs of federal workers have also taken a bite, Daniel Zhao, chief economist at job-hunting site Glassdoor, noted in a commentary last week."The job market continues to stand tall as headwinds from President Trump's tariffs start to blow," Zhao wrote. "Tariff impacts will likely show up later in the year, but in the interim, the job market is waiting for the other shoe to drop." Read the original article on Investopedia
The Hill
29 minutes ago
- The Hill
Hawley bill would raise minimum wage to $15
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) wants to double the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour, with legislation filed Tuesday to increase the rate adopted nearly two decades ago. 'For decades, working Americans have seen their wages flatline,' Hawley said in a statement to The Hill. 'One major culprit of this is the failure of the federal minimum wage to keep up with the economic reality facing hard-working Americans every day.' The increase would take effect next year, when Hawley's home state hikes its rate to the same level. Most states, like Missouri, have set minimum hourly wage levels above the $7.25 federal rate, and nearly a dozen of them will have minimum rates at or above $15 an hour after increases take effect this year. Five states — Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee — have never set their own rates, and three — Georgia, Oklahoma and Wyoming — have state minimums below $7.25 per hour. Those eight states all default to the federal rate. The Hawley legislation, cosponsored by Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.), also would set automatic increases to match inflation over time to prevent future standstills like the nation has faced since the last federal hike in 2009. Minimum wage hikes have historically faced pushback from some business advocacy groups. 'This proposal would more than double the minimum wage and slash over 800,000 jobs,' Rebekah Paxton, research director at the Employment Policies Institute, said in a statement on Hawley's latest push. 'An overwhelming majority of economists agree that drastic minimum wage hikes cut employment, limit opportunities for workers and shutter businesses.' 'Hawley's proposal would take similar failed policies like California's and export them nationwide,' she added. It's unclear whether the GOP-controlled Senate and House will take up the bipartisan legislation or what the timeline could look like as lawmakers try to hash out President Trump's priority legislation. The White House declined to comment on Hawley's proposed minimum wage increase. A spokesperson told The Hill in an email that they would not 'get ahead of the President on pending legislation.' Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent rejected the idea of increasing the minimum wage earlier this year. But Trump acknowledged in a 'Meet the Press' interview a month before the start of his second presidency that the current minimum wage is 'very low' but said he didn't want to raise it to a level that would ultimately force businesses to shutter. 'There is a level at which you could do it, absolutely,' the then-president elect told host Kristen Welker. 'I would consider it.' Trump added that the debate is 'very complicated' because the cost of living varies among states. 'It would be nice to have just a minimum wage for the whole country, but it wouldn't work because you have places where it's very inexpensive to live,' he said.
Newsweek
34 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Trump Administration To Give $1,000 Boost to All Newborn Babies
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump has announced a $1,000 tax-deferred investment account for American babies born during his second term. The president revealed his plans at a roundtable at the White House on Monday, alongside several prominent CEOs, including those of Uber and Goldman Sachs. Newsweek has contacted the White House and the Democratic Party, via email, for comment. Why It Matters The president said these "Trump Accounts" are "fully funded through targeted reforms in the One Big Beautiful Bill," a piece of legislation that has faced much criticism and sparked the now-viral spat with Elon Musk. The broad budget package passed the House by one vote and is now headed to the Senate, where some Republicans have voiced concerns about certain parts of the bill, which the Congressional Budget Office has said will add $2.4 trillion to the U.S. national debt. President Donald Trump speaks during an "Invest in America" roundtable with business leaders at the White House, Monday, June 9, 2025, in Washington. President Donald Trump speaks during an "Invest in America" roundtable with business leaders at the White House, Monday, June 9, 2025, in Washington. AP What To Know The White House said the accounts will "afford a generation of children the chance to experience the miracle of compounded growth and set them on a course for prosperity from the very beginning." Every U.S. citizen born after December 31, 2024, before January 1, 2029, will receive a one-time contribution of $1,000 that will "track the overall stock market," Trump said. The accounts, which will be controlled by guardians, can allow additional private contributions of up to $5,000 annually. "This is a pro-family initiative that will help millions of Americans harness the strength of our economy to lift up the next generation. And they will be getting a big jump on life, especially if we get a little bit lucky with some of the numbers and the economies into the future," Trump said. "In addition to the substantial financial benefits of investing early in life, extensive research shows that children with savings accounts are more likely to graduate high school and college, buy a home, started a business and are less likely to be incarcerated. Trump Accounts will contribute to the lifelong success of millions of newborn babies," he added. The White House has expressed some concern about declining birth rates, with Vice President JD Vance saying on January 24 that he wanted "more babies" to be born in the U.S. In February, Trump signed an executive order expanding access to in vitro fertilization for Americans. And Transport Secretary Sean Duffy directed his department to give funding precedence to "communities with marriage and birth rates higher than the national average." The White House has also explored giving women a "baby bonus" of $5,000 to encourage Americans to have more children, The New York Times reported in April. What People Are Saying House Speaker Mike Johnson said: "It's a bold, transformative policy that gives every eligible American child a financial head start from day one. Republicans are proud to be the party we always have been. It supports life and families, prosperity and opportunity." Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon: "This initiative gets at the core of binding those future generations to the benefits and the potential of America's great companies and markets. Early childhood investments have far-reaching benefits, and Goldman Sachs is proud to support his initiative ... Our economy's future vitality is dependent on young people understanding the power of investing for the long term." Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi: "What if we could give that same powerful, real, tangible hope that comes from having a stake in your own future and a stake in the best companies in the world to every single child that's born in this country? That's the promise of the Invest in America Act. It's not just an account; it's a launchpad. It puts the unstoppable engine of compounding to work for our kids, building a future for them from day one." What Happens Next The bill, which includes the "Trump Accounts" program, is headed to the Senate, where changes are expected as legislators aim for a July 4 deadline. The chamber has a 53-47 Republican majority, so there is only a little room for GOP dissent if the bill is to become law.
