Bain et al v. AstraZeneca LP et al

Filing 57

ORDER GRANTING CERTAIN PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO EXTEND TIME, DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO THESE PLAINTIFFS, ORDERING COUNSEL TO FILE A DECLARATION AND MAINTAINING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on October 19, 2012. (cwlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/19/2012)

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

LISA BAIN, et al.,

5

7

ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al.,

8

Defendants.
________________________________/

ORDER GRANTING
CERTAIN
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION
TO EXTEND TIME,
DISCHARGING ORDER
TO SHOW CAUSE AS
TO THESE
PLAINTIFFS,
ORDERING COUNSEL
TO FILE A
DECLARATION AND
MAINTAINING CASE
MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE

LISA SAUNDERS, et al.,

No. C 09-4148 CW

6

9

Plaintiffs,

No. C 09-4147 CW

v.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13

Plaintiffs,

14
15
16

v.
ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al.,

17

Defendants.
________________________________/

18

KIMBERLY KESSLER, et al.,

19
20

No. C 09-4149 CW

Plaintiffs,
v.

21

ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al.,

22

Defendants.
________________________________/

23
24

CYNTHIA ARNOLD, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

25
26
27
28

v.
ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al.,
Defendants.
________________________________/

No. C 09-4157 CW

1
2

ANGEL COLON, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

3
4
5

v.
ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al.,

6

Defendants.
________________________________/

7

MARK COFFEY, et al.,

8
9

No. C 09-4161 CW

Plaintiffs,
v.

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

No. C 09-4158 CW

ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al.,

11

Defendants.
________________________________/

12
13

SHARON DISTON, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

14
15
16

No. C 09-4165 CW

v.
ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al.,

17

Defendants.
________________________________/

18

DAMON BROWN, et al.,

19
20

No. C 10-0288 CW

Plaintiffs,
v.

21

ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al.,

22

Defendants.
________________________________/

23
24

DENNIS O’BRIEN, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

25
26
27
28

No. C 10-0289 CW

v.
ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al.,
Defendants.
________________________________/
2

1

On September 20 and 21, 2012, Plaintiffs’ counsel indicated

2

that seventy-seven Plaintiffs had failed to respond to counsel’s

3

extensive efforts to contact them and have not indicated whether

4

they will or will not participate in the Master Settlement

5

Agreement (MSA) reached in these cases.

6

for an order to show cause why claims brought by these Plaintiffs

7

should not be dismissed with prejudice.

The parties jointly moved

8

On September 26, 2012, the Court granted the motion and

9

ordered the seventy-seven Plaintiffs to show cause, within twenty-

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

one days of the date of the Order, why their cases should not be

11

dismissed with prejudice.

12

Plaintiffs alternatively could have new counsel appear before this

13

Court on their behalf, or may communicate with counsel regarding

14

their agreement to or rejection of the MSA.

15

ordered Plaintiffs’ counsel to provide notice of the Order to the

16

seventy-seven Plaintiffs and to file a certification that such

17

notice had been sent.

18

counsel to file, within twenty-two days from the date of the

19

Order, a declaration stating whether these Plaintiffs have since

20

communicated with counsel regarding their agreement to or

21

rejection of the MSA.

22

The Court also stated that these

The Court further

Finally, the Court ordered Plaintiffs’

On September 28, 2012, Plaintiffs’ counsel filed a

23

certificate of service attesting that the Court’s September 26,

24

2012 Order had been served upon the seventy-seven Plaintiffs.1

25
26
27
28

Plaintiffs’ counsel filed this declaration in the docket of
only one of the above-named cases, see Docket No. 56 in 09-4147,
but included all of the cases in the caption of the document. In
the future, counsel shall file documents in the dockets of all
cases included in the document’s caption.
1

3

1

On October 17 and 19, 2012, Plaintiffs’ counsel filed a

2

motion on behalf of twelve of the seventy-seven Plaintiffs,

3

stating that these twelve Plaintiffs had contacted counsel about

4

the September 26, 2012 Order and had expressed a desire to

5

participate in the MSA, and requesting that the Court allow them

6

until Monday, October 22, 2012 to finalize their claims.

7

Upon consideration of these twelve Plaintiffs’ Motion, and
for good cause shown, the Court GRANTS their request and extends

9

the deadline to finalize their claims to Monday, October 22, 2012

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

8

(Docket Nos. 49 in 09-4148, 51 in 09-4149, 59 and 60 in 09-4157,

11

53 in 09-4158, 51 in 09-4161, 46 in 10-288).

12

DISCHARGES the order to show cause as to these twelve Plaintiffs.

13

The Court further

The Court notes that, in these motions, Plaintiffs’ counsel

14

did not indicate whether the other sixty-five Plaintiffs addressed

15

in the September 26, 2012 Order have communicated with counsel

16

regarding their agreement to or rejection of the MSA.

17

also has not filed a separate declaration addressing this, as

18

required in the September 26, 2012 Order.

19

counsel to file a declaration addressing the status of these

20

sixty-five Plaintiffs by Monday, October 22, 2012.

21

Counsel

The Court ORDERS

The Court MAINTAINS the case management conference that is

22

currently set for November 7, 2012 at 2:00 p.m.

23

include in their case management statement, due one week before

24

the conference, a list of the remaining Plaintiffs.

25

The parties shall

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26
27
28

Dated: October 19, 2012

CLAUDIA WILKEN
United States District Judge
4