Pharmacare Case

Words: 2001
Pages: 9

As an associate at the firm of Dewey, Chetum, and Howe, I will examine a claim that John, a former researcher at PharmaCARE has brought to my attention. John claims that he and a group of researchers reformulated a drug by the name of AD23 to maximize its effect to slow the progression of Alzheimer’s disease. The issues that John claims are alarming, they include the development of a subsidiary compounding pharmacy called CompCARE in which participated in encouraging and accepting bogus prescriptions from doctors. .Also, CompCARE advertised direct to consumers and marketed to hospitals, clinics and physicians, even though compounding pharmacies are prohibited from selling in bulk. PharmaCARE went as far as selling CompCARE to its’ direct competitor Wellco just weeks before the drug AD23 was linked to hundreds of cardiac deaths. As consumers of AD23 began dying at …show more content…
An employee sold its secrets to the Chinese. The company's proprietary software ended up in the hands of its biggest customer, Sinovel Wind Group Co. AMSC, makes the controls that make wind turbines work; it had been selling those parts to Sinovel, a wind turbine manufacturer. Then, suddenly, Sinovel refused to accept the parts it had ordered. Later, AMSC executives said they discovered that Sinovel stopped paying for shipments because it had stolen AMSC's proprietary technology and had started using it. The AMSC employee who sold the precious codes was convicted in an Austrian court and sentenced to a year behind bars. Separately, AMSC filed three civil suits and one arbitration case against Sinovel in Chinese courts, seeking $1.2 billion for the rejected shipments and the value of its allegedly stolen intellectual property. Sinovel's actions last year dealt a major setback to AMSC - one that cost the company millions and triggered the layoff of hundreds - but one from which AMSC vows it will recover (Anderson,