Eisenberg et al v. Bayer Corporation et al
Filing
22
ORDER STAYING BRIEFING, Motions terminated: 20 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER to Stay Briefing Pending Rulings on Motion to Remand and Motion to Dismiss in Sangimino, et al. v. Bayer Corp., et al. filed by Bayer Essure Inc., Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., Bayer Corporation, Bayer HealthCare LLC.. Signed by Judge Alsup on 4/25/17. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/27/2017)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Alycia A. Degen, SBN 211350
adegen@sidley.com
Bradley J. Dugan, SBN 271870
bdugan@sidley.com
SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
555 West Fifth Street, Suite 4000
Los Angeles, California 90013
Telephone: +1 213 896-6000
Facsimile: +1 213 896-6600
Attorneys for Defendants and Specially
Appearing Defendants Bayer Corporation,
Bayer Essure Inc., Bayer HealthCare LLC,
Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc.
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
) Case No. 3:17-cv-01761-WHA
) Order re:
) JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY
Plaintiffs,
) BRIEFING PENDING RULINGS ON
) MOTION TO REMAND AND
vs.
) MOTION TO DISMISS IN
) SANGIMINO, et al. v. BAYER CORP.,
BAYER CORP.; BAYER HEALTHCARE
) et al.
LLC; BAYER ESSURE INC., (F/K/A
CONCEPTUS, INC.); BAYER HEALTHCARE )
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; and DOES 1-10, )
)
inclusive,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
HEATHER EISENBERG, et al.,
23
24
25
26
27
28
Order re:
JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY BRIEFING; CASE NO. 3:17-cv-01761-WHA
1
Plaintiffs Heather Eisenberg, et al., and defendants and specially-appearing defendants Bayer
2
Corporation, Bayer Essure Inc., Bayer HealthCare LLC, and Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc.
3
(collectively, “Bayer”), hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
4
1.
Plaintiffs filed their complaint on February 27, 2017, in the Superior Court for the
5
State of California, County of Alameda. In their complaint, Plaintiffs assert claims involving the
6
Essure® Permanent Birth Control System (the “Essure® Device”).
7
8
9
10
2.
On March 30, 2017, Bayer removed the matter from the Alameda County Superior
Court to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. [Dkt. No. 1].
3.
Bayer filed its Motion to Dismiss on April 6, 2017, on the grounds of federal
preemption, among other grounds. [Dkt. No. 13].
11
4.
Plaintiffs have indicated their intention to file a Motion to Remand.
12
5.
On April 7, 2017, this matter was deemed related to another matter pending before
13
this Court involving the Essure® Device, captioned as Elizabeth Ann Sangimino, et al. v. Bayer
14
Corp., et al., Case No. 3:17-cv-01488-WHA. [Dkt. No. 16].
15
6.
In the Sangimino matter, the Court has already set a briefing schedule on Bayer’s
16
Motion to Dismiss, which is similar to the Motion to Dismiss filed in this matter, and on Plaintiffs’
17
Motion to Remand, which is similar to the Motion to Remand which Plaintiffs intend to file in this
18
matter. The briefing schedule on those motions in Sangimino is as follows:
19
•
April 28, 2017: Bayer’s deadline to respond to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand;
Plaintiffs’ deadline to respond to Bayer’s Motion to Dismiss;
20
21
•
May 12, 2017: Bayer’s deadline to file a reply in support of the Motion to Dismiss;
Plaintiffs’ deadline to file a reply in support of the Motion to Remand;
22
23
•
June 8, 2017: Hearing on Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Remand.
24
7.
In light of the close overlap between the issues being briefed in Sangimino and those
25
that will be presented to the Court in this matter, the parties have met and conferred and agree that it
26
would be in the interest of judicial economy to stay the briefing in this matter pending the Court’s
27
rulings on the Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Remand in Sangimino. The Parties thus respectfully
28
Order re:
1
JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY BRIEFING; CASE NO. 3:17-cv-01761-WHA
1
request and ask the Court to enter an order in this matter staying all briefing on Bayer’s Motion to
2
Dismiss and Plaintiffs’ anticipated Motion to Remand until such time.
3
4
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
5
Dated: April 24, 2017
SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
6
By: /s/ Alycia A. Degen
Alycia A. Degen
Bradley J. Dugan
7
8
Attorneys for Defendants and Specially
Appearing Defendants
Bayer Corporation, Bayer HealthCare LLC,
Bayer Essure Inc., and Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc.
9
10
11
12
Dated: April 24, 2017
13
SKIKOS, CRAWFORD, SKIKOS & JOSEPH
By: /s/ Mark Crawford
Mark Crawford
14
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Heather Eisenberg, et al.
15
16
17
Filer’s Attestation: Pursuant to Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), regarding signatures, Alycia A. Degen hereby
18
attests that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from counsel for Plaintiffs.
19
Dated: April 24, 2017
20
By: /s/ Alycia A. Degen
Alycia A. Degen
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Order re:
2
JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY BRIEFING; CASE NO. 3:17-cv-01761-WHA
1
[PROPOSED] ORDER
2
PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION, and for good cause shown, IT IS
3
ORDERED THAT the briefing on Bayer’s Motion to Dismiss, and the deadline for Plaintiffs to file
4
their anticipated Motion to Remand, are STAYED pending the Court’s rulings on the Motion to
5
Dismiss and Motion to Remand in the related case Sangimino v. Bayer Corp., et al., Case No. 3:17-
6
cv-01488-WHA.
7
8
Dated: April 25 2017
__,
___________________________________
Honorable William H. Alsup
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
221132925
1
[PROPOSED] ORDER - CASE NO. 3:17-cv-01761-WHA
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?