Karen bartlett was given a generic version of sulindac, an anti-inflammatory drug. the result was that she developed toxic epidermal necrolysis, a disease that disfigured and blinded her. she brought suit alleging that there were warnings that should have been put on the generic version of the drug because issues with the skin infections were being reported. however, the manufacturer to sulindac did not have fda approval to place the warning on the product. the jury awarded ms. bartlett $21 million, and the generic manufacturer appealed the decision. which of the following theories would be the best approach for the generic manufacturer to take in order to have the verdict reversed? a. the commerce clause b. substantive due process c. preemption d. due process because of the excessive size of the verdict