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


November 18, 2010

IN RE YASMIN AND YAZ (DROSPIRENONE)) MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
GARDNER
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
HORNBY
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
LABELLE
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
LODATO
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
MCMILLAN
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
MYERS
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
BRITT
v.
BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMS., INC., ET AL.
MCGAHA
v.
BAYER CORP., ET AL.
PATTON
v.
BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMS., INC., ET AL.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, Chief Judge

MDL No. 2100

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Defendant Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc.'s ("Bayer") motion, pursuant to Case Management Order 12 ("CMO 12"), for an Order dismissing Plaintiffs' claims in the above-captioned matters without prejudice for failure to comply with their Plaintiff Fact Sheet ("PFS") obligations.*fn1 Bayer contends that the Plaintiffs in the above-captioned matters have not served substantially complete PFSs and are therefore delinquent pursuant to CMO 12.

Under Section E of CMO 12, Plaintiffs were given 14 days from the date of Defendant's motion*fn2 to file a response either certifying that they served upon Defendants and Defendants received a completed PFS, and attaching appropriate documentation of receipt or an opposition to Defendant's motion.

Only one Plaintiff in the above-captioned member actions timely filed a response to Bayer's motion to dismiss pursuant to CMO 12. Plaintiff Megan Britt (member action number 3:10-cv-10399) filed a response certifying that she had corrected the deficiencies in her PFS and that the necessary documents had been served upon Bayer (Britt Doc. 13).

The Plaintiffs in the remaining member actions have failed to file any response to Bayer's motion to dismiss. Because the remaining Plaintiffs have failed to respond, in any way, to Bayer's allegations that the submitted PFSs are not substantially complete, the Court finds that the remaining Plaintiffs in the above-captioned member actions have failed to comply with the requirements of CMO 12.

Accordingly, the Court hereby Orders as follows:

1. The motion to dismiss filed in Britt v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, et al. No. 3:10-cv-10399-DRH-PMF is DENIED as MOOT.

2. The following member actions are dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with the requirements of CMO 12:

Gardner v. Bayer Corp., et al. No. 3:10-cv-10034-DRH-PMF Hornby v. Bayer Corp., et al. No. 3:10-cv-10105-DRH-PMF LaBelle v. Bayer Corp., et al. No. 3:09-cv-10088-DRH-PMF Lodato v. Bayer Corp., et al. No. 3:10-cv-10131-DRH-PMF McMillan v. Bayer Corp., et al. No. 3:10-cv-10048-DRH-PMF Myers v. Bayer Corp., et al. No. 3:10-cv-10020-DRH-PMF McGaha v. Bayer Corp., et al. No. 3:10-cv-20222-DRH-PMF Patton v. Bayer HealthCare Pharms., Inc., et al. No. 3:10-cv-10267-DRH-PMF

Further, the Court reminds Plaintiffs that, pursuant to CMO 12 Section E, unless Plaintiffs serve Defendants with a completed PFS or move to vacate the dismissal without prejudice within 60 days after entry of this Order, the Order will be converted to a Dismissal With Prejudice upon Defendants' motion.

SO ORDERED

David R. Herndon Chief Judge United States District Court


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.