Bain et al v. AstraZeneca LP et al

Filing 76

ORDER ADDRESSING FUTURE FILINGS AND DATES AND GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE CERTAIN DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL FOR IN CAMERA REVIEW. Further Case Management Conference set for 1/9/2013 02:00 PM. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 12/14/2012. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/14/2012)

Download PDF
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 LISA BAIN, et al., 5 6 Plaintiffs, v. 7 ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al., 8 Defendants. ________________________________/ 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 LISA SAUNDERS, et al., 13 ORDER ADDRESSING FUTURE FILINGS AND DATES AND GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE CERTAIN DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL FOR IN CAMERA REVIEW No. C 09-4148 CW Plaintiffs, 11 12 No. C 09-4147 CW v. ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al., 14 Defendants. ________________________________/ 15 KIMBERLY KESSLER, et al., 16 17 No. C 09-4149 CW Plaintiffs, v. 18 ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al., 19 Defendants. ________________________________/ 20 21 CYNTHIA ARNOLD, et al., Plaintiffs, 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 v. ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al., Defendants. ________________________________/ No. C 09-4157 CW 1 ANGEL COLON, et al., 2 3 Plaintiffs, v. 4 ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al., 5 Defendants. ________________________________/ 6 7 MARK COFFEY, et al., 9 10 No. C 09-4161 CW Plaintiffs, 8 United States District Court For the Northern District of California No. C 09-4158 CW v. ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al., 11 Defendants. ________________________________/ 12 SHARON DISTON, et al., 13 14 No. C 09-4165 CW Plaintiffs, v. 15 ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al., 16 Defendants. ________________________________/ 17 18 DAMON BROWN, et al., Plaintiffs, 19 20 21 No. C 10-0288 CW v. ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al., 22 Defendants. ________________________________/ 23 DENNIS O’BRIEN, et al., 24 25 No. C 10-0289 CW Plaintiffs, v. 26 ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al., 27 Defendants. ________________________________/ 28 2 1 DONALD BATES, et al., 2 Plaintiffs, 3 4 v. ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al., 5 Defendants. 6 ________________________________/ 7 CAROLYN HARRISON, et al., 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California No. C 09-4150 CW No. C 09-4151 CW Plaintiffs, v. ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al., 11 Defendants. 12 ________________________________/ 13 TODD BOGGIS, et al., 14 15 16 No. C 09-4159 CW Plaintiffs, v. ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al., 17 Defendants. 18 ________________________________/ 19 ANTONIO BURTON, et al., 20 21 22 23 24 No. C 09-4162 CW Plaintiffs, v. ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al., Defendants. ________________________________/ 25 26 27 28 3 1 GLORIA MILLER, et al., 2 3 4 No. C 09-4163 CW Plaintiffs, v. ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al., 5 Defendants. 6 ________________________________/ 7 BONG NGYUEN, et al., 8 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 Plaintiffs, v. ASTRAZENECA, LP, et al., 11 12 No. C 09-4166 CW Defendants. ________________________________/ 13 On December 12, 2012, the Court held a case management 14 conference and hearing on various motions to withdraw as counsel 15 in the above-captioned cases. 16 management conference for Wednesday, January 9, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. 17 The Court previously extended the deadline for certain 18 Plaintiffs represented by the Miller Firm to finalize their 19 participation in the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) until 20 January 7, 2013. 21 remaining Plaintiffs represented by the Mulligan Law Firm, Bobby 22 Gott, Pamela Hoard and Michael Debelis, until January 7, 2013 to 23 finalize their participation in the MSA or otherwise resolve their 24 claims. 25 this deadline. 26 The Court set a further case The Court now extends the deadline for the If needed, counsel may file a further motion to extend Prior to finalizing the settlements or otherwise dismissing 27 the claims of any remaining Plaintiff represented by either firm, 28 the Court directs the Miller Firm and the Mulligan Law Firm to 4 1 advise the Plaintiff in writing of certain inaccuracies in prior 2 communications discussed at the case management conference. 3 Before providing this letter to any of these Plaintiffs, the 4 Miller Firm and the Mulligan Law Firm shall submit it for the 5 Court’s review and approval. 6 letters under seal for in camera review. 7 They are granted leave to file the By January 10, 2013, the Miller Firm and the Mulligan Law 8 Firm shall file sworn declarations from each of their past or 9 present employees who communicated with the Plaintiffs for whom United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 stipulations of dismissal have already been filed. 11 declarations, the declarant shall address the matters specified by 12 the Court at the case management conference. 13 to obtain declarations from certain employees by that date, 14 counsel shall file a declaration stating the names of these 15 employees and what efforts were made to obtain a declaration. 16 Counsel is granted leave to file each of these declarations under 17 seal for in camera review. 18 legal brief addressing the propriety of the communications that 19 counsel and the Garretson Resolution Group sent. 20 In these If counsel is unable By that date, counsel may also file a At the hearing, the Court granted the motions to withdraw as 21 counsel for Plaintiffs Bevelon Johnson through her survivors, 22 Maxine Roark and Carol Scaramuzza. 23 11-5, withdrawal is subject to the condition that papers may 24 continue to be served on counsel for forwarding purposes, unless 25 and until these Plaintiffs appear by other counsel or pro se. 26 Court directs their former counsel to provide a copy of this 27 order, and notice to these Plaintiffs or their survivors that the 28 Court has granted the motion to withdraw, subject to the condition 5 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule The 1 specified above, that a case management conference will be held 2 before this Court on January 9, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. and that these 3 Plaintiffs must attend in person or through new counsel, or their 4 cases will be dismissed for failure to prosecute. 5 serve this notice on these Plaintiffs within three days of the 6 date of this Order and shall file a declaration attesting that 7 they have done by that date. 8 9 Counsel shall At the hearing, the Court deferred ruling on the Miller Firm’s motion to withdraw as counsel for Lynus Stewart. The Court United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 noted that, from the evidence attached to the declaration of David 11 Dickens regarding Mr. Stewart, it appeared that counsel had served 12 Mr. Stewart with notice of the motion at an address counsel had in 13 October 2012, but did not send a copy to a new physical address 14 for Mr. Stewart that counsel located in early November 2012. 15 Court sets Wednesday, January 9, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. for a further 16 hearing on the Miller Firm’s motion to withdraw as counsel and 17 January 7, 2013 as the deadline for Mr. Stewart to file any 18 opposition or other response to the motion. 19 Miller Firm to serve further notice of the motion on Mr. Stewart 20 at all addresses that it has for him within three days of the date 21 of this Order and to file proof of service with the Court. 22 The The Court directs the By Wednesday, December 19, 2013, the parties shall notify the 23 Court if they have agreed to private mediation with the previous 24 mediator. 25 Judge for a settlement conference regarding the claims made by 26 Plaintiff Eric Negray and any other Plaintiffs who may wish to 27 proceed with litigation. If they do not, they will be referred to a Magistrate 28 6 1 The Miller Firm, the Mulligan Law Firm and counsel for 2 Defendants are granted leave to appear by telephone at the January 3 9, 2013 case management conference and motion hearing. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 6 7 Dated: 12/14/2012 CLAUDIA WILKEN United States District Judge 8 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 7

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?