046 RESPONSE filed by Food and Drug Administration re 40 MOTION to Intervene for a Limited Purpose

Pfizer Documents (PHMPT/FDA)

Pfizer Bla Submission

Pfizer Court Documents

4

Document text

1 
 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 
____________________________________  
      )  
PUBLIC HEALTH AND MEDICAL  ) PROFESSIONALS FOR   ) TRANSPARENCY,     ) 
) 
Plaintiff,  ) 
) 
v.    )  Civil Action No. 4:21-cv-01058-P 
) 
UNITED STATES FOOD AND DRUG ) ADMINISTRATION,    )  
) 
Defendant.  ) 
___________________________________  )   
 
DEFENDANT FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION’S RESPONSE TO PFIZER 
INC’S MOTION FOR LEA VE TO INTERVENE FOR A LIMITED PURPOSE  
 Pursuant to the Court’s Order of Janua ry 21, 2022, Dkt. No. 43, Defendant Food and 
Drug Administration (“FDA”) reports  that it consents to Pfizer Inc.’s Motion for Leave to 
Intervene for a Limited Purpose (“Pfizer’s Moti on to Intervene” or “Motion”), Dkt. Nos. 40-41, 
insofar as Pfizer moves for permissive interventi on under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(b).  
As Pfizer noted in its Motion, “it is the Government’s province to make the relevant 
determinations under FOIA.” Dkt. No. 40 at 2. However, due to the unp recedented speed with 
which the Court has ordered FDA to process th e records at issue, FDA anticipates that 
coordination with Pfizer to obtai n the company’s views as to which portions of the records are 
subject to Exemption 4, the Trade Secrets Act (“TSA”), 18 U.S.C. § 19 05, or other statutory 
protections will be a necessary component of the agency’s endeavors to meet the extraordinary 
exigencies of this case. See Defendant’s Motion to Partially M odify Scheduling Order, Dkt. No. Case 4:21-cv-01058-P   Document 46   Filed 01/25/22    Page 1 of 4   PageID 2057Case 4:21-cv-01058-P   Document 46   Filed 01/25/22    Page 1 of 4   PageID 2057
 
 
2 
 
 37, at 6 (explaining that these efforts are alrea dy underway, and anticipated to evolve). Pfizer’s 
participation in this matter will f acilitate these necessary communications. 
Additionally, as FDA previously explained, if  the agency determines not to withhold 
information that might be confidential comm ercial information, it is required under some 
circumstances  to provide notice to the company that submitted the information. See, e.g.,  21 
C.F.R. §§ 20.47, 20.48, 20.61(e). The submitter in that circumstance may challenge the disclosure under the Administra tive Procedure Act (a “reverse FOIA” claim), and may assert a 
violation of another statute such as the TSA . See Doe, 1 v. Federal Election Comm’n , 920 F.3d 
866, 872 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (holding that, because “FOI A is a disclosure statute,” “the agency 
cannot possibly violate FOIA” in disclosing information (citing Chrysler v. Brown , 441 U.S. 281, 
292 (1979)); see also Northrop Grumman Sys. Corp. v. NASA , 346 F. Supp. 3d 109, 116 (D.D.C. 
2018) (holding that in “reverse -FOIA cases” “an aggrieved party may bring an action under the 
APA to enjoin an agency from releasing proprie tary information under FOIA in violation of the 
Trade Secrets Act” or on the basis that disclo sure is otherwise “unl awful or arbitrary and 
capricious ‘agency action.’”). Thus, this case ma y require expedited judi cial resolution of any 
“reverse FOIA” issues that may arise. It would fu rther judicial efficiency to resolve in the same 
case the FOIA claim and any related “reverse FOIA” claims cognizable under the APA, and 
Pfizer’s participation in these proc eedings will further this interest. 
Accordingly, FDA shares Pfizer’s view th at, in the unusual and indeed extraordinary 
circumstances here presented, Pfizer’s intervention would facilitate an orde rly resolution of this 
matter, and consents to Pfizer’s intervention pursuant to Rule 24(b). 
 Dated: January 25, 2022   Respectfully submitted, Case 4:21-cv-01058-P   Document 46   Filed 01/25/22    Page 2 of 4   PageID 2058Case 4:21-cv-01058-P   Document 46   Filed 01/25/22    Page 2 of 4   PageID 2058
 
 
3 
 
       B R I A N  M .  B O Y N T O N        Acting Assistant Attorney General       C i v i l  D i v i s i o n       
      ELIZABETH J. SHAPIRO  
      Deputy Director        F e d e r a l  P r o g r a m s  B r a n c h      
      /s/ Antonia Konkoly    
ANTONIA KONKOLY 
Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 1100 L Street, N.W. Room 11110 Washington, D.C. 20005 Tel: (202) 514-2395 Email: [email protected] 
 
Counsel for Defendant   Case 4:21-cv-01058-P   Document 46   Filed 01/25/22    Page 3 of 4   PageID 2059Case 4:21-cv-01058-P   Document 46   Filed 01/25/22    Page 3 of 4   PageID 2059
 
 
4 
 
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE  
 
 I hereby certify that on January 25, 2022, I el ectronically transmitted the foregoing to the 
parties and the clerk of court fo r the United States District Cour t for the Northern District of 
Texas using the CM/ECF filing system.  
/s/ Antonia Konkoly    
ANTONIA KONKOLY 
Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 1100 L Street, N.W. Room 11110 Washington, D.C. 20005 Tel: (202) 514-2395 Email: [email protected] 
 
 
 
 Case 4:21-cv-01058-P   Document 46   Filed 01/25/22    Page 4 of 4   PageID 2060Case 4:21-cv-01058-P   Document 46   Filed 01/25/22    Page 4 of 4   PageID 2060