City of Winter Haven v. Cleveland Indians Baseball Company Limited Partnership

Filing 605

EXHIBIT 25

1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
TRANSCRIPT OF PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION Docket No.6:06-MD-1769-Orl-22DAB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. IN RE: : SEROQUEL PRODUCTS LIABILITY : LITIGATION : MDL DOCKET No. 1769 : : ALL CASES : : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:

Orlando, Florida August 22, 2007 1:30 p.m.

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

BEFORE THE HONORABLE DAVID A. BAKER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE APPEARANCES:
For The Plaintiffs: Larry M. Roth

Scott Allen F. Kenneth Bailey Camp Bailey E. Ashley Cranford Dennis Canty Lawrence Gornick Glenn Kramer Fletch Trammell Holly Wheeler Angela Nixon Robert Cowen Gail Pearson

2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Proceedings recorded by mechanical stenography, transcript produced by computer-aided transcription.

For the Defendant AstraZeneca: Fred Magaziner Stephen J. McConnell James Freebery
Robert Ciotti

Liz Balakhani

ALSO PRESENT:

Orran Brown, Special Master

Court Reporter:

Sandra K. Tremel

116 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 some. right now, today, and this week without all the documents we need. And now we're going to build in -THE COURT: materials and the -MR. GORNICK: THE COURT: And the training materials -You're talking about the marketing

Yes. -- and all that stuff. You

MR. GORNICK: THE COURT: had access to -MR. GORNICK:

But you've gotten some of that.

We have some.

We definitely have

And I'm worried that not having that stuff -- and Some

some of this doesn't have to do with technical reps. of it we just don't have categories. voice mails.

We still don't have

We still don't have that fax attachments. The document

We still don't have track change documents. they put into evidence the last time -THE COURT: that in September. MR. GORNICK: Okay. I understand.

Well, I'm going to deal with all

And we'll

move to case specific discovery.

Mr. Canty has a

situation that hasn't arisen yet and he's prepared to explain that. MR. CANTY: Thank you, Your Honor.

I guess point by point, first, with respect to case specific disclosures that are ongoing and ongoing

117 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 deficiencies in those disclosures, on July 27th you ordered and defendants agreed that there would be a production of the disclosure materials in the electronic format in which they were maintained by the defendants, manipulable, searchable and it's not happening. On August 6, they made the September disclosures in the same format that they made them before. And despite

meet and confer efforts following that, they remain -- the September disclosures are without the electronic Excel files that the defendants are maintaining. Further, the -- and this is the kind of thing that we're getting as far as the IMS data and this is, you know, virtually illegible for someone particularly like somebody I'm trying to take a deposition but also incomplete. There are various forms -- various kinds of

data that are available to this sales representative detailing the positions among them, not just Seroquel prescription, total Seroquel prescriptions, new Seroquel prescriptions and the same prescriptions for the other atypical anti-psychotics on the market and those materials just aren't being provided. And that's one point I think it probably should be a response and then I'll continue. MR. MAGAZINER: With regard to electronic, as I

understand it, and this is being handled by Fabian,

118 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Benson -- maybe Mr. Freebery knows something about this. No? It's handled by Fabian, Benson. This is the first

I've heard that there was a problem. As far as I know, we are giving them in electronic for the call notes. Mr. Canty says they're not -That's

Mr. Canty says he's only receiving hard copies. news to me.

May I address Mr. Canty directly, Your Honor, try to figure out what the problem is? THE COURT: No. I'll tell you how we're going Let's wait until you finish the

to deal with this issue.

August depositions and you can have a -- if there's -- you can flesh this out in your meet and confer. And then if

plaintiffs need to file a motion to compel after that, I'll hear it in our September conference. MR. CANTY: If I may, Your Honor, there are a

number of things that are supposed to be -- that are going to be triggered from the production of those disclosures. It's going to be -- we're going to have to designate a sales representative. Now, we can't -- if we have the proper electronic form, we can search the data, we can sort it, we can sort it by, for example, sales representative by date and make an assessment as to which sales rep it is that we want, then we disclose a sales rep for them to find. And if

119 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that sales rep is a former employee, they have to go subpoena that person, possibly, if they don't make an offer of representation. THE COURT: Let me back off what I just said.

I'll say this, that this is -- I didn't think this would be an issue, but I anticipated it might be. It's a -- this is a -- the whole case specific scheduling for each month is a difficult and delicate dance for each side to pick your plaintiffs, pick your doctor, pick your sales rep and make sure you got the relevant documents and has to happen very fast in sequence. And you need to have the information -- enough

information to pick the sales rep you think you want, just as defendants need to figure out which doctor they want so that you can get these people onto a calendar. So I'm going to dump this on to Mr. Brown as to whether if you think you're not getting the documentation you need to make your designation timely, you take it up with the PMO in a specific case and he will bash heads and resolve it. an order. And if he thinks you've got enough information for you to proceed, you proceed. And the whole point of And if he needs to get an order, he can get

having the PMO is that you can do this fast enough so that we don't end up running these things out beyond the end of

120 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the month. And, like I say, I recognize it's just a whole lot of things have to happen one right after the other. So

everybody has to be proceeding on that basis and that's why we'll have -- that'll be a more substantive portion of the PMO's undertaking and simply scheduling and telling doctors to do what doctors don't like to do, just listen to lawyers. And if that's not working, I'll find out about it from Mr. Brown in his next report. What else have you got? MR. CANTY: One other issue, Your Honor, is --

and I'll try and fuss with my electronics here a little bit at the same time, too -- but it's an issue that isn't contemplated by CMO4 and it isn't something that's been before the Court yet but it's something that we're probably going to see a lot of and that is, CMO4 contemplates a situation where plaintiff has gone to one physician, perhaps a psychiatrist, got a prescription for Seroquel and then perhaps received treatment for the resulting injuries from a different physician, more typically a general practitioner or a PCP, a primary care physician. CMO4 has ordered disclosures of -- related to those prescribing physicians, and particularly the prescribing