Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Yasmin and Yaz Marketing

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


June 25, 2010

IN RE YASMIN AND YAZ (DROSPIRENONE) MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: BATEMAN
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
BREMME
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
BROSCH
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
COTTMAN
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
DRIVER
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
HOLBEN
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
JOHNSON
v.
BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMS., INC., ET AL.
LOSSE
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
MCGARRY
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
MENDICINO
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
MERRELL
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
MINARDO
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
PANAS
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
REIDENBAKER
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
RICHERSON
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
RODRIGUEZ
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
SAMS
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
SHAFFER
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
SUYDAM
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
TAYLOR
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
TETTAMANTI
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
ZUHR
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: David R. Herndon Chief Judge United States District Court

MDL No. 2100

ORDER

On March 8, 2010, the Bayer Defendants filed motions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction in each of the above listed cases (total of 22 member actions). The basis for the motions was that, in each case, there existed one or more non-diverse defendants. As is explained below, the jurisdictional issue pertaining to these member actions has been resolved in all but two cases:

The Plaintiffs in 19 of the 22 member actions have dismissed the non-diverse defendant or non-diverse defendants and have filed amended complaints reflecting this revision. Thus, pursuant to the operative amended complaints, diversity jurisdiction now exists in the following member actions.

1. 3:10-cv-10025

2. 3:09-cv-10069

3. 3:09-cv-10121

4. 3:10-cv-10015

5. 3:09-cv-10168

6. 3:10-cv-10042

7. 3:09-cv-10035

8. 3:09-cv-10067

9. 3:09-cv-10168

10. 3:09-cv-10065

11. 3:10-cv-20006

12. 3:10-cv-10040

13. 3:09-cv-10151

14. 3:09-cv-10172

15. 3:09-cv-10073

16. 3:09-cv-10161

17. 3:09-cv-10198

18. 3:09-cv-10184

19. 3:09-cv-10141

As to member action 3:09-cv-10228 Plaintiff filed a motion for voluntary dismissal and the case has been closed.

As to the remaining two member actions, each Plaintiff shares citizenship with at least one defendant. In member action 3:09-cv-10112, the Plaintiff and Defendant Bayer Healthcare LLC are both citizens of Indiana. In member action 3:09-cv-10102, the Plaintiff and Defendant Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc. are both citizens of Delaware. Because the Plaintiffs in these member actions share citizenship with a named Defendant, this Court lacks diversity jurisdiction and Plaintiffs' actions must be dismissed.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows:

The Bayer Defendants motions for dismissal in the following member actions are denied as moot:

3:10-cv-10025 3:09-cv-10069 3:09-cv-10121 3:10-cv-10015 3:09-cv-10168 3:10-cv-10042 3:09-cv-10035 3:09-cv-10067 3:09-cv-10168 3:09-cv-10065 3:10-cv-20006 3:10-cv-10040 3:09-cv-10151 3:09-cv-10172 3:09-cv-10073 3:09-cv-10161 3:09-cv-10198 3:09-cv-10184 3:09-cv-10141 3:09-cv-10228 (voluntarily dismissed)

The Bayer Defendants motions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction in member actions 3:09-cv-10102 and 3:09-cv-10112 are granted.

SO ORDERED:

20100625

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.