DoJ Questions Court Ruling on Device Preemption
The Justice Department has told the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals that a federal district court decision in a case involving Smith & Nephew hip replacement and resurfacing procedure medical devices held that some tort claims are expressly preempted, when they are not. “To the extent these claims are not expressly preempted, they would be subject to ordinary principles of implied preemption if that issue were properly preserved in this appeal,” the department said in response to an appeals court invitation to address the application of express- and implied-preemption principles in the case
The department notes that the company did not raise implied preemption in its motions before the district court, and also did not raise it in its original appeal briefing. It suggests that the appeals court could properly determine that the issue of implied preemption is not before it.
If the court decides to reach the issue, the department letter says, state law medical device claims that are not expressly preempted remain subject to challenge on implied preemption grounds in certain circumstances.
The department says that where a device is subject to device-specific federal requirements, express preemption preempts state requirements “with respect to” the device that are different from, or in addition to, the federal requirements. But state requirements with respect to other components not subject to device-specific federal requirements fall outside the scope of the law and are not expressly preempted, it says.