Account

Sign in to access your account and subscription

Practice Tip: Pleading of Parallel Claims After Riegel

After <i>Riegel</i>, federal appellate and district courts have reached divergent conclusions regarding the level of specificity required to plead a parallel claim that survives a motion to dismiss. This article provides an overview of the case law on the topic.

12 minute read August 29, 2011 at 02:58 PM
By
Allison M. Rovner
Practice Tip: Pleading of Parallel Claims After Riegel

In Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc., 552 U.S. 312 (2008), the U.S. Supreme Court held that most product liability claims against manufacturers of the riskiest, most critical, and most extensively regulated medical devices are preempted by federal law.

This premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

The Copyright Royalty Board (CRB), which works under the umbrella of the Librarian of Congress, sets statutory-license royalty terms and rates. The U.S. Courts of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently issued two notable decisions about the CRB.

October 01, 2026