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)

Download PDF
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?