Jennifer Marshall v. Ethicon, Inc.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:12-cv-02809,2:12-md-02327 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999972037].. [16-1631]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-1631 Doc: 24 Filed: 11/21/2016 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1631 JENNIFER D. MARSHALL; DAVID C. MARSHALL, Plaintiffs – Appellants, v. ETHICON, INCORPORATED; JOHNSON & JOHNSON, Defendants – Appellees, and JOHNSON & JOHNSON, INC., Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph R. Goodwin, District Judge. (2:12-cv-02809; 2:12-md-02327) Submitted: November 14, 2016 Decided: November 21, 2016 Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tracy W. Houck, Ron Riggle, HOUCK & RIGGLE, LLC, Ruston, Louisiana, for Appellants. David B. Thomas, Daniel R. Higginbotham, THOMAS COMBS & SPANN, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia; Christy Jones, John C. Henegan, Sr., Susana Moore Moldoveanu, BUTLER SNOW LLP, Ridgeland, Mississippi, for Appeal: 16-1631 Doc: 24 Filed: 11/21/2016 Pg: 2 of 3 Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 16-1631 Doc: 24 Filed: 11/21/2016 Pg: 3 of 3 and Marshall PER CURIAM: Jennifer D. court’s orders timely service David dismissing of C. this process and for denying reviewed the the failure their record district to effect motion and for reconsideration. We reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. have action appeal find Marshall v. Ethicon, Inc., Nos. 2:12-cv- 02809, 2:12-md-92327 (S.D.W. Va. Jan. 26 & May 27, 2016). dispense with contentions are oral no argument adequately because presented in the the facts We and legal materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?