2-Methylamino-1-p-tolylpropan-1-one

NAME : 4-methylmethcathinone
IUPAC NAME : 2-methylamino-1-p-tolylpropan-1-one
ALTERNATE NAME : Mephedrone
CHEMICAL FORMULA : C11H15NO
MOLECULAR WEIGHT : 177.24
BOILING POINT : 269.51° C
MELTING POINT : 66.61° C

4-Methylmethcathinone is unscheduled in the United States. It is possible that it could be considered an analog of a scheduled substance, in which case, sales for human consumption or possession with the intent to ingest could be prosecuted under the Federal Analogue Act though we are unaware of any such existing cases (Mar 03 2008. The Federal Analog Act, 21 U.S.C. § 813, is a controversial section of the United States Controlled Substances Act, allowing any chemical "substantially similar" to an illegal drug (in Schedule I or II) to be treated as if it were also in Schedule I, but only if it is intended for human consumption. The banned substances are often called designer drugs.
4-methylmethcathinone is illegal in Sweden since December 15, 2008 and has also reportedly been illegal in Israel since January 2008. In New Zealand, it is not explicitly scheduled and falls outside the strict definitions of an "amphetamine analogue" in the Misuse of Drugs Act Caution :   All legal information should be verified through other sources.
In the UK clubbers have begun using the chemical recreationally  sold as a legal high   , with a gram costing between £25 - £30. Users compare the feelings to those of MDMA and Cocaine with less severe physical effects. Elevated mood, feelings of empathy and strong bonding and contentment are reported as being the key effects favoured by users of Ecstasy and other mood-enhancing club drugs
Recreational use of 4-methylmethcathinone in combination with other serotonergic agents increases the risk of serotonin syndrome due to the drugs stimulating effects on serotonergic activity within the central nervous system.citation needed  At present very little is known about the toxicity of 4-methylmethcathinone
Mephedrone
The name "Mephedrone" appears to have been coined by one or more Internet-based vendors of 4-Methylmethcathinone.
Neo Doves

It is sometimes speculated on Internet forums that 4-Methylmethcathinone is the primary ingredient in pills sold as "Neo Doves.

ALL INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOUT PRODUCTS IS NOT VERIFIED AND IS GATHERED FROM PUBLICLY AVAILABLE SOURCES. CHEMICALS ARE SOLD FOR  NOT MEANT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION.

Case Federal Analog Act Law US

Two cases of note have examined the interpretation of the Federal Analog Act in the USA. Firstly, the case of  USA v. Damon S. Forbes et al. (1992) 806 F.Supp. 232, a district court decision for the district of Colorado, considered the question of whether the drug alphaethyltryptamine (AET) was a controlled substance analogue in the USA. The controlled drugs to which it was alleged that AET was substantially similar were the tryptamine analogues dimethyltryptamine (DMT) and diethyltryptamine (DET).

 AET

 DMT

 DET

In this case, the court ruled that AET was not substantially similar to DMT or DET, on the grounds that (i) AET is a primary amine while DMT and DET are tertiary amines, (ii) AET cannot be synthesized from either DMT or DET, and (iii) the hallucinogenic or stimulant effects of AET are not substantially similar to the effects of DMT or DET. Furthermore the court ruled that the definition of controlled substance analogue given in the Federal Analog Act was unconstitutionally vague, in that

“Because the definition of "analogue" as applied here provides neither fair warning nor effective safeguards against arbitrary enforcement, it is void for vagueness.”

The common law principle that the people should have the right to know what the law is, means that the wording of laws should be sufficiently clear and precise that it is possible to give a definitive answer as to whether a particular course of action is legal or illegal. However despite this ruling the Federal Analog Act was not revised, and instead AET was specifically scheduled to avoid any future discrepancies.

Nonetheless, as a district court decision, the force of precedent for this case is limited to the federal district of Colorado.

The second case that is relevant is the case of USA v Washam (2002) 312 F.3d 926, 930, an appellate decision for the third judicial circuit in which it was considered whether the drug 1,4-butanediol (1,4-B) was a controlled substance analogue in the USA. The controlled drug which it was alleged 1,4-B was substantially similar to was gamma-hydroxybutyrate (GHB).

 1,4-B

 GHB

In this case the court ruled that 1,4-B was substantially similar to GHB, on the grounds that (i) “1,4-Butanediol and GHB are both linear compounds containing four carbons and that there is only one difference between the substances on one side of their molecules”, and (ii) that 1,4-B is metabolized into GHB by the body and so produces substantially similar physiological effects.

It was raised in defence that 1,4-B and GHB contain different functional groups, and that the food additive monosodium glutamate (MSG) also metabolizes into GHB in the body, but these were not held to be grounds to consider 1,4-B not substantially similar to GHB.

It was also raised in the case of Washam that the Federal Analog Act was unconstitutionally vague, but in this case the court rejected this argument on the grounds that the defendant’s actions in concealing her activities and lying to DEA agents showed that she knew her actions were illegal, and furthermore that “…a person of common intelligence has sufficient notice under the statute that 1,4-Butanediol is a controlled substance analogue.” The court in Washam construed the Analogue Act to require parts A(i) and either A(ii) or A(iii), and concluded the Act was constitutionally permissible upon this construction.

As a result of Walsham, the Federal Analog Act has been upheld (at least for the states and territories comprising the third judicial circuit) and can be considered valid at the present time