Welcome to our new website! If this is the first time you are logging in on the new site, you will need to reset your password. Please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org if you need assistance.
Your membership opens the door to free learning resources on demand. Check out the Member Knowledge Center for free webcasts, publications and online courses.
Hear from leaders around the globe as they share insights about their experiences and lessons learned throughout their certification journey.
The Learning Portal will be under maintenance Monday, 6 December between 6 AM and 5 PM EST. Portal functionality will be unavailable during this window.
We apologize for any inconvenience caused during this time.
Posted 02 October 2012 | By Alexander Gaffney, RAC
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought against the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) by several current and former agency employees after FDA allegedly spied on their whistleblowing activities to members of Congress and other oversight agencies.
DOJ's motion, filed on 1 October-almost exactly a year after the case was first filed-seeks dismissal based on a "lack of jurisdiction."
Bloomberg explains DOJ argues that any whistleblowing claims must first be reviewed through an administrative process run by the Office of Special Counsel (OSC). Before those processes are exhausted, the plaintiffs should not be allowed to seek judicial relief, argues DOJ.
Presiding Justice Robert L. Wilkins did not make any ruling on the motion, giving the plaintiffs, represented by Steven Kohn of the National Whistleblowers Foundation, time to respond.
If the motion is granted, it could prove to be more of a delaying tactic than anything else. In previous statements, OSC-an Executive Branch agency charged with protecting whistleblowers-has seemed to side with the FDA whistleblowers.
OSC's head, Special Counsel Carolyn Lerner, wrote in a February 2012 press release that she believed FDA's activities could potentially, "Dissuade employees from making important disclosures," and may have broken the law. A follow-up guidance released in June 2012 by the agency seemed to again take aim at FDA, calling on federal agencies to, "Heed whistleblower rights" when monitoring potentially protected activities.
The case is Paul T. Hardy v. Jeffery E. Shuren, case number 1:2011cv0139.
Tags: Kohn, NWC, National Whistleblowers Council, Reviewers, Whistleblowers, Taylor, FDA Nine, Shuren, Lawsuit, Latest News, medical device
Regulatory Focus newsletters
All the biggest regulatory news and happenings.