American Conference Institute
FDA Enforcement Conference
Philadelphia
May 2010
Michael A. Swit, Esq.
Vice President
Standard Disclaimers
 Views expressed here are solely mine and do not
reflect those of my firm or any of its clients.
 This presentation supports an oral briefing and
should not be relied upon solely on its own to
support any conclusion of law or fact.
2
What I Will Cover
 Warning Letters
 FDA Case Referral Process/Role of DOJ and U.S. Attorney
 Coordination with States
 Collateral Consequences of FDA Enforcement Actions
3
Warning Letters – 2004 to 2008
4
Why a Warning Letter?
 RPM 4-1
 “When it is consistent with the public protection responsibilities of the
agency and depending on the nature of the violation, it is the Food and
Drug Administration’s (FDA's) practice to give individuals and firms an
opportunity to take voluntary and prompt corrective action before it
initiates an enforcement action. Warning Letters are issued to achieve
voluntary compliance and to establish prior notice.”
 Only for violations of regulatory significance -- those violations that
may lead to enforcement action if not promptly and adequately
corrected.
 Agency's principal means of achieving prompt voluntary compliance
with the Act.
5
Things to Know About a Warning Letter

A key aim: ensure seriousness and scope of observed
violations are understood by top management and that the
appropriate resources are allocated to fully correct the
violations and to prevent recurrence.
 Reiterated in Hamburg’s August 2009 speech

Not final agency action – is informal and advisory
 Not a prerequisite to further FDA Enforcement
 Prior promises to correct (e.g., in 483 reply) may not bar a
WL
6
Things to Know About a Warning Letter …
 Instances where a warning letter may not occur, but go
straight to other enforcement action:
 Repeat violations
 Intentional or flagrant violations
 Continuing violations
 Violation presents a reasonable possibility of injury or death
7
Things to Know About a Warning Letter …
 Factors FDA Follows on Whether to Issue a Warning
Letter (when correction promised):
 Firm’s compliance history –
 history of serious violations, or
 failure to prevent the recurrence of violations
 Nature of violation, e.g.,
 a violation that the firm was aware of (was evident or discovered)
but failed to correct
 Risk associated with the product and the impact of the
violations on such risk
 Overall adequacy of the firm’s corrective action and whether
the corrective action addresses the specific violations, related
violations, related products or facilities
8
Things to Know About a Warning Letter …
 Factors Determining Whether to Issue a Warning
Letter (when correction promised):
 Promised correction contains provisions for monitoring and
review to ensure effectiveness and prevent recurrence
 Whether documentation of the corrective action was provided
to enable the agency to undertake an informed evaluation
 Whether the timeframe for the corrective action is appropriate
and whether actual progress has been made in accordance
with the timeframe
 Whether the corrective action taken ensures sustained
compliance with the law or regulations.
9
FDA Expectations for Your Response

Wants to Hear Your D.R.U.M. – expects your response to
have these qualities:
 Direct – i.e., address the items directly raised in the 483 or
warning letter
 Related – go beyond those to potentially related problems
 Universal – expand to review those issues company-wide
 Management & Monitoring – show that you will stay on
top of the issues and that management is involved
Source: “Compliance and Enforcement.” Presentation by David K.
Elder, Director, FDA Office of Enforcement, at the Orange County
Regulatory Affairs (OCRA)/FDA Joint Educational Conference. June
15, 2005. Irvine, California.
10
FDA Judicial Case Referral Process -- Overview
 Three Approaches:
 Field – HQ – Office of Civil Litigation (OCL)
 OCL – USAO assistance
 Condemnation – FDA to USAO (and OCL at same time)
 But, if complicated issues, should involve OCL
 FDA Office of Criminal Investigation (“OCI”) – to USAOs
usually via OCL; sometimes directly
 Civil Penalties and Injunctive Relief –
 also need blessing of the Assistant Attorney General for the
Civil Division
 Criminal Prosecutions – go to OCL
 Reference source – Regulatory Procedures Manual, Ch. 6
11
Federal and State Cooperation
 Investigations Operations Manual (IOM) – Chapter 3 –
 3.1.1 - POLICY
“The scope of consumer protection is extended by cooperative efforts of federal, state,
and local agencies and international cooperation. Procedures to appropriately share
responsibilities and cooperate with our consumer protection partners are essential.”
 Cooperation with Other Federal Agencies – extensive
 Marshal’s Service – seizures
 Government Wide Quality Assurance Program (“GWQAP”)
– government contracting – GMP compliance
 FBI – Federal Anti-Tampering Act (“FATA”)
 CDC – Food borne outbreaks
 Secret Service – prevent food poisoning of protected U.S.
officials
12
Federal and State Cooperation …
 Situations Where States Have Exclusive Jurisdiction
 Food – produced and consumed solely within a stat
 Where FDA and States Cooperate -- examples
 Embargo authority – FDA lacks; many states have.
 IOM – “do not routinely request”
 Joint inspections – e.g., Compounding Pharmacy – California
inspected with FDA present
 Delegated inspections – FDA can request
13
The Collateral Consequences of
Violating the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act …
Or
“Why Crime Does Not Pay”
14
“Does Crime Pay?” – Problems Beyond
Jail and Fines
 PROBLEMS FOR
INDIVIDUALS IF
CONVICTED:
 Lose right to vote
 Lose right to run for
public office
 Damage to reputation
15
“Does Crime Pay?” -- Problems Beyond Jail
and Fines
 PROBLEMS FOR
INDIVIDUALS IF
CONVICTED):
 Can be deported if
not a U.S. citizen
 Financial ruin - lose your job
16
“Does Crime Pay?” -- Problems Beyond
Jail and Fines
 PROBLEMS FOR COMPANIES CAUSED BY
CONVICTIONS:
 Shareholders sue the company, its officers and directors
 Other companies may sue the company
(e.g., Mylan Labs sued Par and others)
 Federal government may suspend or “debar” company
from selling to government
 “Qui Tam” actions under the False Claims Act -- e.g.,
Lifescan & Neurontin cases -- “whistle blower” cases -- leading
to civil damages and may also spawn a criminal prosecution
17
“Does Crime Pay?” -- Problems Beyond
Jail and Fines
 PROBLEMS FOR COMPANIES CAUSED BY
CONVICTIONS :
 FDA may refuse to approve NDAs, PMAs or other filings
under Application Integrity Program (AIP)
 May lose state licenses
 Customers abandon you
 Decreased sales may force lay-offs of employees
18
“Does Crime Pay?” -- Problems Beyond
Jail and Fines
 PROBLEMS FOR COMPANIES CAUSED BY
CONVICTIONS :
 Financing disappears -- banks may refuse to lend money
 May violate lending agreements, real estate mortgages or
leases
 A criminal investigation can cause great disruption to
normal business activities
19
“Does Crime Pay?” -- Problems Beyond Jail
and Fines
 PROBLEMS FOR COMPANIES CAUSED BY
CONVICTIONS :

High cost in money of an investigation:
– lost sales
–
stock price falls
–
attorney’s fees and costs
–
consultants fees
–
costs of complying with requests by
government for documents
20
So, What Are The Costs?
 Direct Costs






Criminal Fines -- $2,800,000
Legal Fees -- $4,000,000
Consultant Fees -- $5,000,000
Shareholder Litigation -- $2,200,000
Competitors Litigation -- $13,000,000
Lost Sales – one year alone – down $49,000,000
TOTAL Direct costs/lost sales – $75,900,000 (just one year of lost sales)
 Indirect Costs
 Stock price – dropped from $27 per share to $3 per share; market cap from about
$297,000,000 to $33,000,000
 Employees – 900 to 450
 Approvals -- ANDAs – none approved for about 5 years
 Quad Subsidiary – shut down fully
 Other Common Direct Costs (often not present in older cases; common since 1999)
 False Claims Act
 Consent Order Disgorgement
21
Questions?
Call, e-mail, fax or write:
Michael A. Swit, Esq.
Vice President
The Weinberg Group Inc.
336 North Coast Hwy. 101
Suite C
Encinitas, CA 92024
Phone 760.633.3343
Fax 760.454.2979
Cell 760.815.4762
michael.swit@weinberggroup.com
www.weinberggroup.com
22
About your speaker…
Michael A. Swit, Esq., is a Vice President at THE WEINBERG GROUP, where he develops and ensures the
execution of a broad array of regulatory and other services to drug and biologics clients seeking to market products in
the United States. His expertise includes FDA development strategies, compliance and enforcement initiatives, recalls
and crisis management, submissions and related traditional FDA regulatory activities, labeling and advertising, and
clinical research efforts.
Mr. Swit has been addressing critical FDA legal and regulatory issues since 1984. His multi-faceted experience
includes serving for three and a half years as corporate vice president, general counsel and secretary of Par
Pharmaceutical, a prominent, publicly-traded, generic drug company and, thus, he brings an industry and commercial
perspective to his work with FDA-regulated companies. Mr. Swit then served for over four years as CEO of
FDANews.com, a premier publisher of FDA regulatory newsletters and other specialty information products for the
FDA-regulated community. His private FDA regulatory law practice has included service as Special Counsel in the
FDA Law Practice Group in the San Diego office of Heller Ehrman White & McAuliffe and with the Food & Drug
Law practice at McKenna & Cuneo, both in the firm’s Washington office and later in San Diego. He first practiced
FDA regulatory law with the D.C. office of Burditt & Radzius.
Mr. Swit has taught and written on a wide variety of subjects relating to FDA law, regulation and related commercial
activities, including, since 1989, co-directing a three-day intensive course on the generic drug approval process and
editing a guide to the generic drug approval process, Getting Your Generic Drug Approved. A former member of the
Food & Drug Law Journal Editorial Board, he also has been a prominent speaker at numerous conferences sponsored
by such organizations as RAPS, FDLI, and DIA. A magna cum laude graduate of Bowdoin College, he received his
law degree from Emory University Law School and is a member of the California, D.C. and Virginia bars.
23