County of San Joaquin, et al. v. Purdue Pharma, L.P. et al.
Filing
28
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., on 9/13/17, ORDERING that McKesson Corporation will not be required to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint in this Court. (Kastilahn, A)
5
Clara J. Shin (Bar No. 214809)
Jun Li (Bar No. 315907)
COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
One Front Street
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: (415) 591-6000
Facsimile: (415) 591-6091
cshin@cov.com
junli@cov.com
6
Attorneys for Defendant McKesson Corporation
7
11
Francis O. Scarpulla (Bar No. 41059)
Patrick B. Clayton (Bar No. 240191)
LAW OFFICES OF FRANCIS O. SCARPULLA
456 Montgomery Street, 17th Floor
San Francisco, California 94104
Telephone: (415) 788-7210
Facsimile: (415) 788-0706
fos@scarpullalaw.com
pbc@scarpullalaw.com
12
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
13
[Additional Counsel Appear on Signature Page]
1
2
3
4
8
9
10
14
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
15
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
16 COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN, CITY OF
STOCKTON, and MONTEZUMA FIRE
17 PROTECTION DISTRICT,
Plaintiffs,
18
v.
19
PURDUE PHARMA L.P., PURDUE
20 PHARMA INC., THE PURDUE TEVA
FREDERICK COMPANY, INC.,
PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC.,
21 CEPHALON, INC., JOHNSON &
JOHNSON, JANSSEN
22 PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., ORTHO
MCNEIL-JANSSEN
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. N/K/A
23 JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.,
JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICA, INC. N/K/A
24 JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.,
ENDO HEALTH SOLUTIONS INC., ENDO
25 PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; McKESSON
CORPORATION; and DOES 1-100,
INCLUSIVE,
26
Defendants.
27
Case No.: 2:17−CV−01485−MCE−GGH
STIPULATION FOR DEFENDANT
MCKESSON CORPORATION NOT
TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT IN
FEDERAL COURT; ORDER
Current Response Date:
September 22, 2017
28
2:17−CV−01485−MCE−GGH
STIPULATION FOR DEFENDANT MCKESSON
CORPORATION NOT TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT IN
FEDERAL COURT
1
1
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 143, Plaintiffs County of San Joaquin, City of Stockton,
2
and Montezuma Fire Protection District (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) and Defendant McKesson
3
Corporation (“McKesson”), by and through their respective counsel, subject to approval of this
4
Court, hereby stipulate and agree that because McKesson will not remain a party to this federal
5
court action once the Court rules on the Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand (Dkt. 21), and as it serves
6
the interests of judicial economy and efficiency if McKesson is not required to respond to the
7
Complaint in this Court, the Parties request the Court’s approval to relieve McKesson from the
8
requirement from responding to the Complaint in this Court:
9
10
11
WHEREAS, on May 25, 2017, Plaintiffs commenced this suit in San Joaquin County
Superior Court;
WHEREAS, on July 17, 2017, all defendants except for McKesson (the “Removing
12
Defendants”) removed this action to federal court on the grounds that McKesson is a
13
dispensable party, is fraudulently joined, and is fraudulently misjoined;
14
15
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Remand on August 16, 2017, alleging that
McKesson is a properly-joined defendant and cannot be severed from this action;
16
WHEREAS, the hearing on the Motion to Remand is currently set for October 19, 2017;
17
WHEREAS, if the Court rules in favor of the Removing Defendants and denies
18
Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand, McKesson will be severed or dismissed from this action;
19
WHEREAS, if the Court grants Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand, and finds that McKesson
20
is a properly-joined defendant, there will be no diversity jurisdiction, the case will be remanded
21
to state court, and McKesson, along with all other defendants, will no longer be litigating before
22
this Court;
23
WHEREAS, the parties stipulate and agree that under either outcome—removal to
24
federal court or a remand back to state court—McKesson will not remain a party to this federal
25
action and should not be required to respond to the Complaint in this Court;
26
27
WHEREAS, McKesson’s current deadline in this Court to respond to the Complaint is
September 22, 2017;
28
2:17−CV−01485−MCE−GGH
STIPULATION FOR DEFENDANT MCKESSON
CORPORATION NOT TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT IN
FEDERAL COURT
2
1
WHEREAS, without the requested relief, McKesson will be required to answer or file a
2
Rule 12(b)(6) motion in this Court at that time, as well as a duplicative answer or demurrer in
3
state court after the Court decides Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand;
4
5
WHEREAS, the requested relief will conserve judicial resources and promote judicial
efficiency; and
6
WHEREAS, Civil Local Rule 143 requires the Court’s approval for all stipulations;
7
NOW THEREFORE, subject to approval by the Court, the Parties hereby stipulate that
8
McKesson shall be relieved of any requirement that it answer or otherwise respond to the
9
Complaint in this Court.
10
IT IS SO STIPULATED:
11
12
DATED: September 7, 2017
COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
CLARA J. SHIN
JUN LI
13
14
By:
15
16
Attorneys for Defendant
McKesson Corporation
17
18
/s/Clara J. Shin
Clara J. Shin
DATED: September 7, 2017
LAW OFFICES OF FRANCIS O. SCARPULLA
19
By:
20
21
/s/Francis O. Scarpulla
Francis O. Scarpulla
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
22
Additional Counsel:
23
William H. Parish (Bar No. 95913)
PARISH GUY CASTILLO, PC
1919 Grand Canal Boulevard, Suite A-5
Stockton, California 95207-8114
Telephone: (209) 952-1992
Facsimile: (209) 952-0250
Email: parish@parishlegal.com
24
25
26
27
28
2:17−CV−01485−MCE−GGH
STIPULATION FOR DEFENDANT MCKESSON
CORPORATION NOT TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT IN
FEDERAL COURT
3
J. Mark Myles, County Counsel
San Joaquin County
44 North San Joaquin Street
Sixth Floor, Suite 679
Stockton, California 95202
Telephone: (209) 468-2980
Facsimile: (209) 468-0315
Email: jmyles@sjgov.org
1
2
3
4
5
6
Counsel for San Joaquin County
7
10
John M. Luebberke, City Attorney
City of Stockton
425 North El Dorado Street, Second Floor
Stockton, California 95202
Telephone: (209) 937-8333
Facsimile: (209) 937-8898
11
Counsel for City of Stockton
8
9
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2:17−CV−01485−MCE−GGH
STIPULATION FOR DEFENDANT MCKESSON
CORPORATION NOT TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT IN
FEDERAL COURT
4
1
ORDER
2
The Court has reviewed and considered the Stipulation submitted by Plaintiffs and
3
Defendant McKesson Corporation in the above-captioned action. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY
4
ORDERED that McKesson Corporation will not be required to answer or otherwise respond to
5
the Complaint in this Court.
6
IT IS SO ORDERED.
7
8
9
Dated: September 13, 2017
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2:17−CV−01485−MCE−GGH
STIPULATION FOR DEFENDANT MCKESSON
CORPORATION NOT TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT IN
FEDERAL COURT
5
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?