Companies [Appontment and Qualifications of Secretary] Amendment Rules, 2009 [India]

rodney.ryder@foxmandallittle.com (Rodney D. Ryder) — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 05:42:36 GMT

The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has vide notification dated January 5, 2009 [please refer to the text below] has raised the limit of paid up share capital for compulsory appointment of a company secretary (under wholetime employment) in an Indian company, from Rs. 2 crores to Rs. 5 crores.

This notification shall come into force from the 15th day of March, 2009.

Companies [Appointment and Qualifications of Secretary] Amendment Rules, 2009 - Amendment in Rule 3

NOTIFICATION NO. G.S.R. 11 (E), DATED 5-1-2009
In exercise of the powers conferred by clauses (a) and (b) of sub-section (1) of section 642 read with clause (45) of section 2 and section 383A of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Companies (Appointment and Qualifications of Secretary) Rules, 1988, namely :—

1. (1) These rules may be called the Companies (Appointment and Qualifications of Secretary) Amendment Rules, 2009.

(2) They shall come into force from the 15th day of March, 2009.

2. In the Companies (Appointment and Qualifications) of Secretary) Rules, 1988, in rule 2,
(i) in sub-rule (1) and in the proviso to sub-rule (4), for the words "rupees two crores" the following words shall be substituted, namely:—
"five crore rupees";
(ii) in sub-rule (3), the second and third proviso shall be omitted;
(iii) after sub-rule (3), the following sub-rule shall be inserted, namely:—

"(3A) A company having a paid up share capital of two crore rupees or more but less than five crore rupees may appoint any individual who possesses the qualification of membership of the Institute of Company Secretaries of India constituted under the Company Secretaries Act, 1980 (56 of 1980), as a whole-time secretary to perform the duties of a secretary under the Companies Act, 1956:

Provided that where a company has appointed under sub-rule (3) or this sub-rule, a whole-time company secretary, possessing the qualification of membership of the Institute of Company Secretaries of India, such a company is not required to obtain a certificate from a secretary in whole-time practice under rule 3 of the Companies (Compliance Certificate) Rules, 2001."

technola

Fri, 09 Jan 2009 04:51:56 GMT

After a brief hiatus, the Technola “resources” page is back up with additional sites and more complete descriptions. It now includes three categories: Legal Aid/Public Interest Law Technology; Nonprofit Technology; and Law Technology We’ll do our best to keep it updated over time (please add your suggestions to the comments). Also, we’ll soon be publishing a blogroll with all [...]

lennyesq

Fri, 09 Jan 2009 02:00:25 GMT

Tweetree - Birds in a tree. Tweetree puts your Twitter stream in a tree so you can see the posts people are replying to in context. It also pulls in lots of external content like twitpic photos, youtube videos and more, so that you can see them right in your stream without having to click through [...]

Tweetree - Birds in a tree.

Tweetree puts your Twitter stream in a tree so you can see the posts people are replying to in context. It also pulls in lots of external content like twitpic photos, youtube videos and more, so that you can see them right in your stream without having to click through every link your friends post.

Health Care Fee For Service is Dead: RIP

levyacar@gmail.com (Carlos Leyva) — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:51:40 GMT

OK, maybe it's not dead yet but it is on its way out if you read between the lines. I caught Stuart Altman on the NewsHour tonight and he gave a nod in that direction. For those of you who...

OK, maybe it's not dead yet but it is on its way out if you read between the lines. I caught Stuart Altman on the NewsHour tonight and he gave a nod in that direction. For those of you who don't know who Stuart is, he is one of the hundred most influential people in health care (according to the link above) and Obama's health care architect.

What is fee for service? It means that doctors get paid for doing work, but not for results. Talk about Soviet style corporate welfare. In no other American industry that I know of is their anything remotely comparable to the idea of fee for service. You hire a mechanic to fix your car and he runs a bunch of tests but when you get the car back the brakes still don't work. In fact, he didn't even look at the brakes, just ran some tests. Can you get your money back? Maybe. At least a court of law would entertain it.

What about doctors? Nope. For the most part they just do stuff and get paid. Don't get me wrong, I don't have anything personally against doctors. I don't do medical malpractice work and have no intention to. What I am against is a system that rewards a concept like fee for service. It has to stop. We desperately need to introduce the idea of competition into healthcare and start rewarding doctors that produce verifiable outcomes (i.e. real benefits to patients measured by results pertaining to a specific medical condition).

Our current system is corrupt and broken. The only discipline today is imposed via malpractice suits and that is just a sorry excuse for a valuable check and balance. I am not opposed to these suits mind you. If you are incompetent and negligent then you pay. That's the way our tort system works, doctors don't get a free pass. But what I am against is such a wickedly stupid way of imposing discipline. We need a bigger carrot and a smaller stick. The bigger carrot is pay for performance.

I for one will not mourn the day fee for service dies. RIP.

One more CLE opportunity

raymond.ward@gmail.com (Raymond Ward) — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:20:44 GMT

In composing my last post, I neglected to mention Writing Techniques for Winning Cases, to be presented by Gary Kinder in Chicago, IL (Mar. 6), Washington, DC (Mar. 27), Los Angeles, CA (Apr. 17), and Houston, TX (June 19). I have to confess that I don’t know much about Gary or his seminar. But the program description looks promising:

Lawyers often mistake forceful advocacy with belittling the other side’s case, exaggerating their own case, and berating opposing counsel. Not only are these and similar tactics professionally irresponsible, they also annoy judges.

In Writing Techniques for Winning Cases, Gary Kinder emphasizes the importance of ethics in writing a persuasive brief and shows lawyers: how to make judges want to decide for them, how to shape a case for impact, how to get the judge’s attention, how to present a case quickly and cleanly, how to capture a judge’s imagination, and how to create arguments no opponent can deny.

Odds and ends

raymond.ward@gmail.com (Raymond Ward) — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:19:38 GMT

Here are a few things I spotted yesterday that are worth a look: The origins of error, by John McIntyre. The errors John speaks of are “rules” that don’t exist—things like split infinitives and ending sentences with prepositions (both okay,...

Here are a few things I spotted yesterday that are worth a look:

The origins of error, by John McIntyre. The errors John speaks of are “rules” that don’t exist—things like split infinitives and ending sentences with prepositions (both okay, but proscribed by the misinformed). How do these myths get started? John explores some possible answers.

Proofreading tips, by Ken Adams. Adams is a contract-drafting expert, but his tips apply to any type of writing.

Ideas for blog posts, by Lynn Gaertner-Johnston. If you write a blog, you probably hit the occasional creative dry spell. Lynn’s ideas may help you get through those dry spells and keep your blog’s content fresh.

ABA Blawg Contest Rigged?

Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:37:50 GMT

Turns out Slaw didn’t do so bad in the ABA blog awards Tech category. After a recount, we’ve placed second! Now for the fun part… Google cache (while it lasts) shows a significant number of votes were removed from the system from the time the contest closed and the final numbers being released. (Hat tip [...]

Turns out Slaw didn’t do so bad in the ABA blog awards Tech category. After a recount, we’ve placed second!

Now for the fun part… Google cache (while it lasts) shows a significant number of votes were removed from the system from the time the contest closed and the final numbers being released. (Hat tip to Bob Ambrogi)

Before the recount:

FutureLawyer, 1930 votes

Technolawyer blog, 1492 votes

Mac Lawyer, 509 votes

Ross Ipsa Loquitur, 348 votes

Slaw, 317 votes

Jim Calloway, 169 votes

Real Lawyers Have Blogs, 132 votes

Ernie the Attorney, 93 votes

Dennis Kennedy, 81 votes

Inter Alia, 64 votes

AND after the recount:

Technolawyer blog, 1499 votes

Slaw, 295 votes

Mac Lawyer, 256 votes

FutureLawyer, 241 votes

Jim Calloway, 150 votes

Real Lawyers Have Blogs, 105 votes

Ross Ipsa Loquitur, 102 votes

Ernie the Attorney, 93 votes

Dennis Kennedy, 82 votes

Inter Alia, 64 votes

Not to throw stones without blame here — we did have 22 votes removed (for which I’ll take full credit - I voted on my mother’s computer at Christmas, and once on IE, FF, Safari, etc.) — but… I KNEW there must be some shenanigans going on.

Top marks to ABA Journal staff for checking duplicate IP addresses. Well done, and crisis averted! … At least for the contest itself. :)

Two examples of Rule Three

Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:10:12 GMT

I teach six rules of survival, the third of which is: "Assume everything you do or say will become publicly known."One reason for the rule is that you may be speaking to more people than you know. Today's news brings...

I teach six rules of survival, the third of which is: "Assume everything you do or say will become publicly known."

One reason for the rule is that you may be speaking to more people than you know. Today's news brings two examples. An associate who allegedly traded on inside information and was taped by a cooperating former conspirator, and, more interestingly, the general counsel to Governor Blagojevich, who participated in wiretapped calls.

Obama Transition Team Requests Delay of DTV Transition Deadline

davidoxenford@dwt.com (David Oxenford) — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 22:53:57 GMT

What a difference a few days makes. At the beginning of this week, it was full speed ahead for the February 17 termination of analog television. Then NTIA announced that it was out of money to pay for DTV coupons to assist the public in buying converter boxes so that analog TV sets will continue to work after the transition. This action, in turn, caused Consumers Union to ask Congress for a delay in the transition, resulting in Congressman Markey's office suggesting that the DTV transition might need to be delayed (as we wrote yesterday). Today, the other shoe dropped as the Obama transition team formally wrote to Congress asking for a delay of the termination of analog television. That letter leaves everyone asking - will Congress respond? If so, what are the ramifications?

The NAB responded with a press release talking about how broadcasters are still prepared to meet the deadline, and how the deadline has focused all parties (TV stations, electronics manufacturers, cable and satellite companies) on doing what they need to do in order to be ready for the transition. But the Obama team's call for the postponement does not seem to be focused on the readiness of program providers to accomplish the switch, but instead on the readiness of viewers to deal with the new digital environment, especially given the lack of coupons for last minute shoppers still waiting to buy their converter boxes. As we've written before, many in Washington are worried about the political ramifications of the transition - especially if millions of people wake up on February 18 and can't watch the Today Show or Good Morning America. And while that is a legitimate concern, one wonders if it will ever be possible to prepare everyone for the transition deadline. Sure, if the deadline is postpone 4 or 5 months, there will be a marginal increase in people who are ready, but there will still be stragglers. Catching up to them all may never happen until they are hit with the reality of their analog sets not working on the day after the transition, whenever that day may be. If so, shouldn't someone at least consider the costs that a delay will impose on broadcasters?

Already, I've heard concerns expressed by broadcasters about all the preparations that have already been made for the final days of the conversion. Tower crews have been scheduled for some of the last minute changes that need to be done right at the end of the transition - like the channel changes that some stations must implement. In many cases, these crews will have to be canceled, as the channel switches can't occur without some analog station shutting off. Some stations will no doubt be subject to contract cancellation fees. Many television broadcasters have prepared budgets anticipating a February turn-off of their analog channels, and when electricity can cost $20,000 a month for some stations, these stations may need to find significant money to pay for the continuing analog operations in a year when any new revenues are hard to come by. Some stations have made deals to dismantle their old analog equipment and sell it off - and buyers may not wait for a delayed transition. And that is to say nothing about public confusion, and perhaps a sky-is-falling mentality that might set in if, after hearing for so long that the transition will occur on February 17, it doesn't really happen.

A delay does have benefits. As we wrote yesterday, it could give television stations time to prepare for analog nightlight operations, digital translators, and even distributed transmission systems. It could give broadcasters more time to refine their message to consumers. One thing that I've noticed in DTV announcements is the impression that over-the-air viewers need only get a converter box to receive digital television on their analog sets after the transition. In fact, as the digital signal can be more subject to interference from obstructions and even from people moving in the same room as the TV set, using the proper antenna can be crucial in determining if the viewer receives a signal (see our post, here). Even programming may benefit, as the transition is now scheduled for just a few weeks after most TV networks introduce their second season programs. After last year's writer's strike, having the DTV transition interfere with the introduction of new network programs could have significant consequences to those networks.

Certainly, there are considerations on both side - and probably considerations that I have not thought of here. We'll have to watch and see how Congress deals with these issues in what was to be the waning days of analog television. And, if there is a change in the date, the FCC will have to decide how it will deal with all the carefully planned transition deadlines that it now has in place. Certainly, the game is on.

Straight man subjected to homophobic abuse

iain@absolvitor.com (Iain Nisbet) — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 22:01:51 GMT

The Court of Appeal has ruled that workplace harrassment "on the grounds of" sexual orientation may be unlawful regardless of whether the victim is (or is thought to be) of the sexuality in question.

A Mr. English was married with children and was not gay. His colleagues knew he was not gay. However, since he had gone to boarding school and lived in Brighton, he was called "faggott" and lurid comments regarding him were published in the works' magazine.

His case for harassment was rejected by the Employment Tribunal - as he was not, in fact, gay.

However, the Court of Appeal held that the behaviour complained of did offend against the Sexual Orientation Regulations. The court stated: "If, as is common ground, tormenting a man who is believed to be gay but is not amounts to unlawful harassment, the distance from there to tormenting a man who is being treated as if he were gay when he is not is barely perceptible."

Sedley LJ opined that the application of anti-discrimination laws should not be dependent on an individual identifying themselves as belonging to one or other strict definition of their sexuality - sexuality being "a nuanced" issue.

School playgrounds up and down the country - take note!

Religious discrimination laws "a dead letter"

iain@absolvitor.com (Iain Nisbet) — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:52:34 GMT

News reaches us from the Christian Legal Centre that Gary McFarlane, a relationship counsellor, has won a claim for wrongful dismissal against Relate Avon. He was sacked because his Christian beliefs prevented him giving sex therapy to homosexual couples. The Employment Tribunal was in December and Mr. McFarlane was represented by religious liberties specialist, Barrister, Paul Diamond.

Gary McFarlane had worked for Relate since 2003. He was disappointed with the hostility he had experienced from Relate. Although Mr McFarlane had never had to provide sex therapy to a same sex couple, he thought that if the situation did arise, he would be able to discuss his Christian views with his supervisors so that his position could be discussed and if necessary accommodated. Any such discussions were, however, pre-empted by unexpected meetings between Mr McFarlane and his manager in October 2007 when he was asked to state his views regarding same sex couples. Despite explaining that he would counsel couples in compliance with Relate's Equal Opportunities Policy, and that he would raise any issues with his supervisors and manager, as good practice required, Mr McFarlane was suspended in early January 2008 and then dismissed in March 2008.

However, although he won his wrongful dismissal claim, the Tribunal held that his claim of religious discrimination should fail. The Tribunal recognised powerful arguments on both sides, but held that the provision of non discriminatory services was important.

Andrea Minichiello Williams Director of the Christian Legal Centre said : "The law is in a confused state; in the case of Lillian Ladele, the Islington Registrar, the Court held that Christian belief must give way to the rights of same sex couples; but in the case of Gary McFarlane there is a finding of wrongful dismissal. The courts and public are confused; we call on the Government to recognise the legitimate expression of conscience by Christians in the area of sexual orientation and provide protection where necessary."

She continued: "It is important to note that Mr. McFarlane has never refused to counsel a same sex couple; he merely raised the potential conflict between his Christian faith and homosexual conduct. It is deeply disturbing that the mere expression of religious belief with an inability to give unqualified support to sexual orientation issues means that a Christian can be dismissed with no attempt to provide suitable accommodation for his or her beliefs. The law preventing religious discrimination against Christians is in danger of becoming a dead letter".

McFarlane v. Relate Avon Limted ET 1401179/08 (Bristol)

technola

Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:45:11 GMT

The Legal Services Corporation’s Technology Initiative Grant cycle is now open, with approximately $2.1 million to grant for technology projects in 2009. Letters of Intent are due Friday, February 20, 2009. Funding is available only to LSC-funded programs. For more info, see the Request for Letters of Intent to Apply for 2009 Grant Funding (PDF). [...]

Charon’s Pageflake for Canadian law blogs

Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:18:33 GMT

I’d like to point out a new resource that I gave a passing mention in the Clawbie awards. Charon QC has launched a new Pageflake for Canadian Law Blogs. While Pageflakes have been around for a while, they remain a great method to collect the latest content from a topical set of RSS feeds. For [...]

I’d like to point out a new resource that I gave a passing mention in the Clawbie awards. Charon QC has launched a new Pageflake for Canadian Law Blogs.

While Pageflakes have been around for a while, they remain a great method to collect the latest content from a topical set of RSS feeds. For those that might not have (or know how to set up) a personal RSS reader, a Pageflake aggregation like this can act as a digital newspaper.

And now as I write this, I see it was previously mentioned via this post by Simon F.… but I’ll relay again anyway. Perhaps some of our web-tech readers will see value in bringing Pageflake style reading to their firm Intranets?

Healthcare Reform: It's the MHR Stupid!

levyacar@gmail.com (Carlos Leyva) — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 20:00:26 GMT

Electronic health records are all the rage in healthcare circles these days and you are likely to see all of the following acronyms used: EMR (electronic medical records), EHR (electronic health record), PHR (personal health record). The healthcare industry uses...

Electronic health records are all the rage in healthcare circles these days and you are likely to see all of the following acronyms used: EMR (electronic medical records), EHR (electronic health record), PHR (personal health record). The healthcare industry uses more acronyms to cause confusion than any other industry I know. The legal and tech industries can't hold a candle to healthcare.

Here's the point, the only electronic health record that matters is the MHR (my health record). Why? Because I am the patient stupid and I don't trust the mostly backward looking healthcare industry to do the right thing with my medical data. I am now on a mission. I will refuse to see a provider that cannot update MHR's (OK emergencies excluded). It looks like I won't be going to see a provider any time soon because as far as I can tell none of them can update MHR's today (sure a few support EHR's but I don't control those records and they live in individual provider silos).

Truth be told an MHR is really a PHR and mine is currently stored on Google Health (Microsoft and others have similar initiatives). All my medications currently automatically update my record thanks to the interfaces between the leading pharmacies and Google Health. There is nothing from a technical perspective that would prevent a provider from updating this record with lab tests, interventions, etc. once I have authorized it.

If the healthcare industry is going to start competing to create "patient value" around a medical condition as Michael Porter suggests in Redefining Health Care (see this post) then a complete MHR that holds all relevant patient data is a requirement, period end of story. The healthcare industry is going to launch the mother of all resistance battles to prevent this from happening. The industry is currently gearing up for the battle because of fears that such an initiative is imminent (and it is).

The first argument will be there are no standards and we can't move forward until we have standards in place. To understand why this argument is bogus read Clay Shirky's article located here. Once this argument is refuted the next battleground will be a move by providers, health plans (more likely), and perhaps the government to OWN the electronic health record. This effort should be resisted by consumers (i.e. all of us) at all costs. Why? There are number of reasons including not the least of which are privacy and confidentiality, but none of those are controlling from my perspective.

The reason that we the consumers need to own our MHR's is because we are the most important stakeholder AND we are the ones BEST positioned to ensure interoperability and a complete record. Huh? You heard it right and here's why. We are never going to get the kind of interoperability needed to compete on patient value between all the systems, from all the players, that need to touch the record and we don't have to. All the systems, from all the players ONLY need to "talk" to one system, the system that holds my MHR (the system of record). I give the required authorization and any provider that needs to reads/updates my record. Problem solved and the patient is in control.

Each healthcare consumer can select whatever system they choose to hold their MHR, but only one. Once we have this in place we can get about the business of implementing many of the suggestions that Porter makes in his seminal work. Until then we are going to "fiddle while Rome burns."

Palm announces Web OS platform - Engadget

Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:46:01 GMT

Palm announces Web OS platform - Engadget. Engadget has posted the first photos of the new Palm Pre, which has a big screen, multi-touch interface, and WiFi support like the iPhone and iPod Touch, but adds long-standing Palm features like a QWERTY keyboard, and a removable battery. It also has a standard 3.5 mm earphone plug, a Micro-SD storage slot, and a 3 megapixel camera. It will use either EvDO or WiFi to connect to the Internet, and runs the new web based OS from Palm. Palm says that anyone who can program for the web can program for WebOS, which is the opposite of Apple's proprietary scheme. Palm may have hit one out of the park with this phone and OS.

LIVE from CES: Palm Unveils Nova and the Palm Pre

Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:27:23 GMT

LIVE from CES: Palm Unveils Nova and the Palm Pre | Peter Kafka | MediaMemo | AllThingsD. Along with the WebOS, Palm is, this afternoon, is demonstrating the PalmPre, a smart phone with a 3.1 inch screen, slide out keyboard, multi-touch interface, a removable battery, AND it handles EvDO and WiFi. It has 8 Gigabytes of memory, and looks like a device designed to have the best of both worlds. Will it be an iPhone or iPod Touch killer? Too soon to tell, but it looks like Palm is back in the game.

Palm CES - WebOS

Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:20:36 GMT

The Official Palm Blog: Live from Las Vegas (3). The long awaited Palm announcement is happening in Las Vegas, and it involves an OS called WebOS that is accessible from any web enabled device. The idea is to make the OS invisible, and ultimately mobile, so that it functions on just about any web device. More information will be available as the day progresses.

CES 2009 - Butterscotch Is The Place

Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:16:04 GMT

@ - @ is on the air. Do you want to know everything that will be going on at CES 2009? Of course you do; so do most lawyer geeks. Andy Walker and his team will be doing regular video...

@ - @ is on the air. Do you want to know everything that will be going on at CES 2009? Of course you do; so do most lawyer geeks. Andy Walker and his team will be doing regular video reports from the show, Grab the feed, and watch the videos as Andy and Sean Carruthers walk the CES floor. It's the next best thing to being there, and you don't have to wipe down the hotel room.

Microsoft begins Windows 7 push

Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:15:34 GMT

BBC NEWS | Technology | Microsoft begins Windows 7 push. In a couple of days, the final beta of Windows 7 will be available for download. This download is not recommended for your main machine; however, if you have more that a gig of RAM and 16 gigs of available space, and a higher end video card on another machine, it might be worth trying out. I will wait until the rest of you try it. New OSes from Microsoft, or any developer, are not for the faint hearted.

Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Industries Face RFID / SCM Challenges and Opportunities in 2009

RFIDblogger@mckennalong.com (RFID Blogger) — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:15:13 GMT

An increase in government activity affecting the use of RFID and other related SCM technologies in the pharmaceutical and medical device industries is expected in 2009, both in the United States and the EU. These actions will drive the future of these technologies and their impact on the precision, efficiency, and safety of pharmaceutical supply chains globally. It will be critical for companies affected by these industries to participate and help shape these government decisions - or risk having harmful decisions made in the next year.

The U.S. Department of Commerce and the European Commission are eager to promote RFID in Europe this spring within the context of the Transatlantic Economic Council. Following a very successful U.S./EU RFID symposium last fall, both sides have committed to jointly pursue frameworks for advancing transatlantic economic integration to build upon the success of an initial RFID pilot project to demonstrate best practices in other areas including health care and environmental sustainability.

Companies concerned with how upcoming RFID/SCM requirements will affect their global supply chains have an opportunity to influence the outcome.

U.S. and EU Collaboration on RFID Standards, Policies, and Implementation

The U.S. Department of Commerce and the European Commission are expected to continue collaboration on RFID within the context of the Transatlantic Economic Council. At the 2007 U.S./EU summit, there was a commitment to jointly pursue adoption of a framework for advancing transatlantic economic integration. The initial U.S./EU collaborative RFID pilot project to sort, track, and monitor medical and industrial radioisotopes in commerce was announced in October 2008. Both sides want to build on the success of that pilot project to demonstrate best practices in other practice areas. As a continuation of this initiative, the European Commission is planning a symposium and "matchmaking" RFID event this spring in Brussels - bringing suppliers, customers, and government entities together to develop mutually beneficial solutions.

Since policymakers in both the EU and U.S. will be carefully monitoring the initial pilot project to inform their decisions about laws and regulations governing RFID in pharmaceutical and medical device supply chains, this forum and matchmaker event is an outstanding opportunity for companies to participate and help shape outcomes with regard to their business strategies.

U.S. Federal E-Pedigree Standards Deadline

In the summer of 2007, the U.S. Congress passed the Prescription Drug User Fee Reauthorization Act, allowing the FDA to collect fees from those seeking drug approval in the U.S. to fund regulatory and oversight operations. Improved drug safety, particularly the need to reduce contaminated and counterfeit drugs from entering U.S. supply chains, continues to be a key focus of federal lawmakers. The legislation gave the FDA 30 months to develop technology standards for imposing electronic pedigree requirements on pharmaceutical products and eventually medical devices. That deadline expires in Spring of 2009. While it is likely to slip, since the new Obama Administration’s political appointments will not be confirmed by then, 2009 will be the year that FDA establishes Federal ePedigree standards. Given the history of support for the technology, that standard will likely include RFID in some way.

This has both positive and negative consequences – the standards established may or may not be consistent with your existing SCM systems, and the likely “phased-in” implementation of new drugs and devices to be covered by the requirement may or may not be consistent with your business strategy. With the recent election of Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) as chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Congress will likely see a more aggressive and regulatory-minded policy maker overseeing the FDA and it’s implementation of these standards. New liabilities, including requirements involving data privacy and security, may enter the debate in new ways.

Recent Articles in Technology from LexMonitor

Companies [Appontment and Qualifications of Secretary] Amendment Rules, 2009 [India]

technola

lennyesq

Health Care Fee For Service is Dead: RIP

One more CLE opportunity

Odds and ends

ABA Blawg Contest Rigged?

Two examples of Rule Three

Obama Transition Team Requests Delay of DTV Transition Deadline

Straight man subjected to homophobic abuse

Religious discrimination laws "a dead letter"

technola

Charon’s Pageflake for Canadian law blogs

Healthcare Reform: It's the MHR Stupid!

Palm announces Web OS platform - Engadget

LIVE from CES: Palm Unveils Nova and the Palm Pre

Palm CES - WebOS

CES 2009 - Butterscotch Is The Place

Microsoft begins Windows 7 push

Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Industries Face RFID / SCM Challenges and Opportunities in 2009