Association for Accessible Medicines v. Becerra

Opinion

ASSOCIATION FOR ACCESSIBLE No. 2:19-cv-02281-TLN-DB MEDICINES, Plaintiff, v. XAVIER BECERRA, in his Official Capacity as Attorney General of the State of California, Defendant.

On December 31, 2019, this Court issued an Order denying Plaintiff Association for Accessible Medicines’s (“AAM”) Motion for Preliminary Injunction (ECF No. 10), seeking to enjoin the enforcement of Assembly Bill 824. (ECF No. 29.) The Court’s Order denying preliminary injunction relied at least in part on finding certain of AAM’s claims not ripe for review. (See id.) AAM filed an interlocutory appeal of the Court’s Order, and on July 27, 2020, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a Memorandum vacating the Order and remanding with instructions to dismiss the case without prejudice. (ECF No. 46, USCA Memorandum.) The circuit panel noted that “[t]he doctrines of standing and ripeness originate from the same Article III limitation and boil down to the same question,” (id. at 2, citing Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus, 573 U.S. 149, 157 n.5 (2014)) and found AAM lacked standing to bring the present action because it “has not shown that there is a ‘substantial risk’ that AB 824 will cause its members to suffer injury that is concrete, particularized, and imminent.” (Id. at 3, citing Clapper v. Amnesty Int’l USA, 568 U.S. 398, 414 n.5.) Pursuant to the Memorandum and Mandate of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (ECF Nos. 46, 47), the action is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the case. DATED: August 25, 2020