Alexander v. Stryker Corp et al

Filing 50

ORDER granting 46 Separate Defendant Argen Corporation's Motion to Dismiss without prejudice; and dismissing Defendant Argen Corporation from this case. Signed by Judge Lee P. Rudofsky on 11/18/2020. (ajt)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION LINDA SUE ALEXANDER v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 4:19-cv-00700-LPR STRYKER CORP, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER   On October 13, 2020, Separate Defendant Argen Corporation (“Argen”) filed a Motion to Dismiss the claims against it in this case. (Doc. 46). Argen is named in the operative complaint as the successor-in-interest to J.F. Jelenko & Co. (“Jelenko”). (Doc. 37 ¶ 7). Argen argues that the complaint is devoid of any factual allegations that would establish that Argen is Jelenko’s successor-in-interest. (Doc. 46 ¶ 3). Argen further argues that no such facts exist because Argen is not Jelenko’s successor-in-interest.1 Argen therefore contends that dismissal is proper under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) because the complaint fails to state a claim against Argen. On November 13, 2020, Plaintiff Linda Sue Alexander filed a short and untimely Response to Argen’s Motion. (Doc. 49). Ms. Alexander states that she “does not object to Defendant Argen Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss.” (Id. ¶ 3). Given all of the foregoing, the Court GRANTS Separate Defendant Argen Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss without prejudice.2 Separate Defendant Argen Corporation is dismissed from this case.   1 (Id.). Argen attached to its Motion “the declaration of Paul Cascone, Senior Vice President of Argen.” (Doc. 46 ¶ 5). The Court did not consider the attachment in making its ruling. See FED. R. CIV. P. 12(d). 2 Neither Argen nor Ms. Alexander expressly stated whether the dismissal should be with prejudice or without prejudice. The Court orders dismissal without prejudice to account for the theoretical possibility that laterdiscovered facts could establish that Argen is Jelenko’s successor-in-interest. IT IS SO ORDERED this 18th day of November 2020. _______________________________________ LEE P. RUDOFSKY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 2

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?