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 Drospirenone Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation

United States District Court, Seventh Circuit

February 3, 2014

IN RE YASMIN AND YAZ DROSPIRENONE MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION MDL No. 2100 This Document Relates to: Paula Bruno, et al.
v.
Bayer Corp., et al. Kay Cochran
v.
Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:11-cv-12142-DRH-PMF Brenda Lee Gilley
v.
Bayer Corp., et al. No. 3:12-cv-11428-DRH-PMF Juanita Higgins, et al.
v.
Bayer Corp., et al. Heather Lewis, et al.
v.
Bayer Corp., et al. Sarah Sinnott, et al.
v.
Bayer Corp., et al.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE (FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PFS OBLIGATIONS)

David R. Herndon, Chief Judge

This matter is before the Court on the Bayer defendants’ motion, pursuant to Case Management Order 12 (“CMO 12”)[5] for an order of dismissal, without prejudice, of the plaintiffs’ claims in the above captioned cases for failure to comply with Plaintiff Fact Sheet (“PFS”) obligations.

Under Section C of CMO 12, each plaintiff is required to serve defendants with a completed PFS, including a signed declaration, executed record release authorizations, and copies of all documents subject to the requests for production contained in the PFS which are in the possession of plaintiff. Section B of CMO 12 further provides that a completed PFS is due “45 days from the date of service of the first answer to her Complaint or the docketing of her case in this MDL, or 45 days from the date of this Order, whichever is later.”

Accordingly, the plaintiffs in the above-captioned matters were to have served completed PFSs on or before March or April 2013 (See e.g., Paula Bruno, et al. v. Bayer Corp., et al No. 3:12-cv-11521-DRH-PMF Doc. 7-1).[6] Per Section E of CMO 12, Notice of Overdue Discovery was sent on May 14, 2013 (See e.g., Paula Bruno, et al. v. Bayer Corp., et al No. 3:12-cv-11521-DRH-PMF Doc. 7-2).[7]As of the filing of Bayer’s motion to dismiss, Bayer still had not received completed PFS materials from the plaintiffs in the above-captioned matters and the plaintiffs’ PFS materials were more than seven months overdue.

Under Section E of CMO 12, the plaintiffs were given 14 days from the date of Bayer’s motion 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.

To date, none of the plaintiffs in the above captioned member actions has filed a response. Because the plaintiffs have failed to respond to Bayer’s allegations, the Court finds that these plaintiffs have failed to comply with their PFS obligations under CMO 12. Accordingly, the claims of the above captioned plaintiffs are hereby dismissed without prejudice.

The Court reminds plaintiffs that, pursuant to CMO 12 Section E, unless plaintiffs serve the 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


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.