Nutrilab, Inc. v. Schweiker’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[Ajrticles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease ... and articles ... intended to affect the structure or any function of the body____”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 727 F. Supp. 1 - Estee Lauder, Inc. v. United States Food & Drug Administration · E.R. Squibb & Sons, Inc. v. Bowen

2. “In [ National Nutritional I ], the FDA attempted to regulate as drugs all vitamin and mineral products in excess of the upper limits of the U.S. Recommended Daily Allowances ('RDA'). To bring these products within the Section 321(g)(1)(B) drug definition, the FDA had to show that the manufacturer's intended use was for treatment of a disease. Because the hearing record disclosed no food or nutrition use of nutrients at such high levels, the FDA inferred that the products were intended for therapeutic use. The court found first, that a significant number of persons have indisputable nutritional need for potencies exceeding the upper limits; and second, that to find actual therapeutic intent under part B of Section 321(g)(1) requires something more than evidence of uselessness as a food for most people. 504 F.2d at 789 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Brady v. Bayer Corp.

3. “(1) articles used for food or drink for man or other animals, (2) chewing gum, and (3) articles used for components of any such article.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 792 F. Supp. 139 - United States v. 29 Cartons, More or Less, of an Article of Food