Krista Carver is a 2006 HLS grad and the Co-chair of Covington & Burling’s global Food, Drug, and Device Practice Group, as well as the firm’s Life Sciences – Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology Industry Group.
Speaker: Krista Carver ’06, Partner at Covington & Burling in Washington D.C.
Practice Area: Regulatory
Specialty: FDA
Where this work can be found: Update forthcoming.
Related practice area specialties: Update forthcoming.
Related Resources
Transcript
FDA : Krista Carver ’06
ANTHONY LOMBARDI: Hello, I’m Anthony Lombardi with OCS. With me today to discuss food and drug regulatory practices. Krista Carver, a 2006 HLS grad and the Co-chair of Covington and Burling Global Food, Drug and Device Practice group, as well as the firm’s life sciences, pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry group. Krista sits in Covington’s Washington, DC office. And thank you so much for joining us today.
KRISTA CARVER: It’s great to be here.
ANTHONY LOMBARDI: Let’s get started. Can you maybe just give a broad overview of what your work as an attorney specializing in FDA practice actually looks like?
KRISTA CARVER: Yeah. So it’s a practice that offers a lot of variety. If you are someone who likes to move around a lot and the types of work you’re doing on a daily basis, it’s a great opportunity.
So a large part of my practice is counseling clients on compliance with FDA regulations. And that includes literally figuring out if a regulation is ambiguous, how can the client best go about complying with it but then also where there are other ambiguities in planning for the life cycle of a product, where do we think that FDA might come out, and what might happen after an agency decision would there be potential litigation and so on.
So the counseling really covers both the FDA regulatory landscape, what the statute says, what the regulations say, but then also other options that a client could have if they wanted to go beyond FDA potential litigation, for example.
Then there’s another component of my practice that’s more advocacy oriented. And often the audience is FDA. Sowe might be filing a citizen petition asking FDA to do or not do something. We might be filing a formal dispute resolution with the agency disputing any the administrative process, a decision that FDA has made.
And also I get involved in litigation. So I’ll work with my litigation colleagues as a subject matter expert on litigation. Sometimes that’s with Covington litigators, and sometimes we’re working with other outside counsel that are both advising the same client, and where we are helpful in preparing briefs and motions for summary judgment and complaints and making sure they’re fully grounded in the applicable regulatory regime.
On the health side, I do also work on the Inflation Reduction Act Medicare Drug Price Negotiation program. Even though I’m an FDA lawyer by training, there are a lot of FDA concepts tucked within that statute, and it’s really critical to understand how the agency approves products, how generic and biosimilar products come to launch in order to fully deal with that grapple with that regime. So that’s something that has been a more recent addition to my practice since that act was passed in 2022.
ANTHONY LOMBARDI: Amazing.
KRISTA CARVER: And then the third part, beyond advocacy at the agency level and in the courts and counseling is legislation. So I work on a lot of different legislative proposals in the Food and Drug and IRA space, advising clients on how to advance their own ideas, respond to other’s ideas, and really contribute to the policy discussions on drug and biotechnology issues.
ANTHONY LOMBARDI: Wow. Thank you so much for that overview. It’s incredibly helpful. I’m wondering, would a student need to have maybe a policy or a health STEM background to really succeed in the area, or do you have advice about demonstrating an interest in the practice classes that they might consider taking? Like, what would be most helpful for them?
KRISTA CARVER: So I think those are two different questions. So let’s break it down. On the first one, do you need a policy health STEM background? I think those things can be helpful, but I would not consider them prerequisites. Myself, I majored as an undergraduate in chemistry. I did some chemistry research, and that is helpful to me and some aspects of what I do, but there are many aspects in which it’s not.
Even with a STEM background, for example, there are sometimes complex issues concerning biology that, even though I’m majored in a science, I don’t know, and I’ll consult with a colleague who does have a biology background. So I think that you don’t– anything you pick, there’ll be something you don’t know. And it’s more important that you’re willing to learn.
We definitely have some incredibly successful people in our practice who were Poli-Sci, English, more liberal arts type majors. And so I certainly wouldn’t consider that to be a disqualifying factor. It’s really more, are you going to roll up your sleeves and learn whatever you need to learn?
And then your second question was what courses might you recommend? Well, I graduated a long time ago, but what do I remember being helpful? I took the patent law class that you offered at the time. I’m not sure if it’s still the same class, but I’m not a patent lawyer, but it’s helpful to know that adjacent practice for FDA regulatory. So I thought that was a really good investment of time.
I also took an advanced legal research class, which I think is really helpful no matter what you do. And I think that’s a very strong recommendation. And how important is this issue that has arisen with FDA. And we’ll be doing that with securities lawyers. So we’re not getting out over our skis, but having a very basic grounding in that area is useful to know when there’s an issue that you need to call in another expert on.
ANTHONY LOMBARDI: Yeah, great. Thank you so much for that. I’m wondering, how did you end up choosing this practice?
KRISTA CARVER: Well, I actually went to law school with the intent of becoming a patent lawyer, having thescience background. I have an uncle who was a practicing patent lawyer for a long time. He absolutely loved his job. And that rubbed off on me as a teenager saying, wow, how many adults are just talking about how much they love their job? So I was very intrigued by that. And I did the undergraduate science major.
When I went to law school, I was interested then in not being pigeonholed. So I tried a lot of different things. And when I came– and then I took Peter Barton’s class that’s still available at HLS on FDA law, and I really liked that. And that was going to be my path.
ANTHONY LOMBARDI: Got it. I’m wondering, could you maybe walk us through a recent matter or project that you’ve worked on in the regulatory space, understanding that you can’t talk about any specific clients, but broad strokes, what’s the type of work that you’re doing on a day to day basis?
KRISTA CARVER: Yeah. So we work on briefs. So I think that those are some things where the fact that we’reinvolved is more public. And so we’ve worked on several of the cases involving the Inflation Reduction Act, constitutionality challenges, and also some issues concerning generic drug labeling.
Those have been good matters to work on with litigation colleagues. I think we bring a lot to those matters as subject matter experts. And so it’s been nice to be involved in those.
I also work very regularly on the pharma-related legislation so that those projects really typically play out as a new bill is introduced in Congress, and we need to analyze it, and we look at how it would amend the underlying statute. What would be the implications of those amendments? How would they help or harm the interests of clients, the interests of the public health, of pharmaceutical innovation?
And so I do a lot of those and I think they’re just many over the years. Perhaps one that’s most notable, it’s not recent, but one that’s most notable in my career is from a very junior level. I was working on the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act, which the first bill was introduced the month that I started at the firm in 2006.
It was a four year legislative process in which we worked with innovators to develop that legislation. And then finally, it was passed in 2010, and I’ve been working on implementation issues ever since. There’s just something about being on the ground of the legislation and seeing every different iteration of it that is so valuable once it becomes the law.
ANTHONY LOMBARDI: Yeah, talk about longevity. I’m wondering, you mentioned that you got staffed as a junior on that, what sorts of roles do juniors typically play on matters like this?
KRISTA CARVER: The nice thing about an FDA regulatory practice is that it’s not as highly leveraged as litigation matters or deals where you may have 10 associates or more, depending on just how large it is. It tends to be moreone partner, one associate. And I think the sky’s the limit in terms of the ability for junior associates to get really involved.
I see it to this day. Some of our current junior associates are already very, very involved in all the strategic decisions for a matter, very much interacting with the client. So I think that’s a nice element of regulatory practice at Covington. I suspect it’s similar at other places, in that, these are just matters that typically have fewer people on them.
ANTHONY LOMBARDI: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. For those junior associates that are really diving right in, are there any standout qualities or skills that are distinguishing them?
KRISTA CARVER: It sounds basic, but enthusiasm is a huge one. Partners are people. They want to hear how much you what they’re doing, and how you’re so excited to work on it. So I think that doesn’t get as much play as it should.
And then you can tell the folks that are really in it to win it. They’re really dedicated and diligent and want to get it right and have a sense of ownership towards the client. Like, this project needs to go out today, and I’m going to be involved in making sure that happens in whatever way is needed. I think those things are probably the most important, of course, being substantively smart and being a good writer.
ANTHONY LOMBARDI: Great. I’m wondering, do you find that the work with the FDA being based out of DC, is it geographically limited? Do you staff across offices? Is there sort of a center of the universe just in the DMV?
KRISTA CARVER: Yes and no. So I would say a significant part of the life sciences regulatory space than it used to be. There’s so much interesting research coming out of Boston, a lot of smaller startup companies, as well as some more established companies.
And I think over time, many firms have come to recognize that Boston is really important and having a strong presence in this area. We recently opened a Boston office a couple of years ago, so and others have done the same. So I consider that to be an important part of the story.
We also have partners in our San Francisco and LA practices that I think play very important roles in FDA. And then we also have some people in New York.
ANTHONY LOMBARDI: Yeah. I’m wondering, what do potential exit opportunities look like?
KRISTA CARVER: Well, I’ve never left, so I can only speak to what I’ve observed other people do. I’m coming up on my 20th year at the firm, and that’s my entire career as a practicing lawyer after passing the bar.
But certainly, what I’ve observed over the years is we see a number of really good people go into the FDA Office of Chief Counsel and other roles within the FDA. Sometimes they’re more policy oriented so office of regulatory policy, other parts of the agency where you’re not technically practicing law, but it’s very useful to have a JD.
We do see people go to more Capitol Hill oriented opportunities working for example, on the Senate, Health Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, legal staff, or energy and commerce on the House side. Occasionally folks will go into health and human services, and the more secretary level, department level.
And then we see lots of folks go in house as well. So many, many of our former colleagues are in-house at different pharmaceutical or medical device or food or other companies of the regulated industry to which we work.
And then also see– I think there’s some degree of variation where some folks will go into academia, that happens from time to time as well. We definitely have folks from our practice that are now general counsels of major companies, and then also many that are in support roles somewhere in the legal organization, very importantroles. And so I would say that those are the main ones as government and in-house with a more occasional academia.
ANTHONY LOMBARDI: Great. Thank you so much for that. I’m wondering, just to wrap it up, do you have just general advice for students or new lawyers that are just breaking into the space and interested in pursuing a career in regulatory law?
KRISTA CARVER: Prepare that it will have a significant learning curve. It is an area where, historically, law schools don’t focus on it as much, reading casebooks and learning about litigation and everything the Supreme Court has said and so on.
And I know that that’s changed somewhat, but I think still hasn’t been a huge emphasis. And so there’s going to be– it’s going to take a little bit of time to feel comfortable in that space. But if you get over that hump, it is very self-building, which is nice.
You’ll start to say, oh, I’ve seen this before. This is my third project on the same issue, and now I really know what I feel like I really know what I’m doing. You have to get through that, I think to– it’s going to be something that’s just part of a regulatory law practice. And I don’t think that’s exclusive to FDA. I think that many other types of regulatory practices are going to have that learning curve.
ANTHONY LOMBARDI: Awesome. Well, Krista, thank you so much for joining us today. We’re going to package this up and really appreciate you taking the time to talk about regulatory law.
KRISTA CARVER: Yes, thank you.
Office of Career Services
4020 Wasserstein Hall (WCC)
1585 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02138