Villanueva v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc et al

Filing 9

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 4/14/2015. (dsw, )

Download PDF

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS IN RE: YASMIN AND YAZ (DROSPIRENONE) MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION ) ) ) ) ) 3:09-md-02100-DRH-PMF MDL No. 2100 This Document Relates to: Nicole Root, et al. v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:10-cv-13159-DRH-PMF Lillan Roquet v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No. 3:12-cv-11234-DRH-PMF Katherine Rygh v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:10-cv-11638-DRH-PMF Jetaun Sallaz v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:11-cv-10576-DRH-PMF Holly Sanchez, et al. v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:11-cv-10632-DRH-PMF Michelle Satterwhite v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:13-cv-10356-DRH-PMF Stephanie Shoucair v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:10-cv-13619-DRH-PMF Malinda Smith v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:11-cv-13083-DRH-PMF Anabelle Soto v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:10-cv-11945-DRH-PMF Katherine Sowinski v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No. 3:10-cv-20387-DRH-PMF Lana Speck v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No. 3:11-cv-20080-DRH-PMF Caitlin Stevens v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No. 3:12-cv-20110-DRH-PMF Megan Stewart v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No. 3:10-cv-20390-DRH-PMF Sara Todd v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:11-cv-13152-DRH-PMF Chrystal Lynette Darbonne Trahan v. Bayer HealthCare No. 3:10-cv-13029-DRH-PMF Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. Michelle Villanueva v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:10-cv-13615-DRH-PMF Jennifer Walther v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:11-cv-10281-DRH-PMF Stormy Whisenhunt v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:11-cv-12222-DRH-PMF Christina Wilkin v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:10-cv-11916-DRH-PMF Heather Williams v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No. 3:12-cv-10767-DRH-PMF Stacey Yates v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:11-cv-12529-DRH-PMF ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE HERNDON, District Judge: On February 10, 2015, Bayer filed a motion to dismiss with prejudice, pursuant to Case Management Order 60 (“CMO 60”), the above captioned plaintiffs’ claims for failure to submit complete Claim Package Materials. 1 Pursuant to the Court’s local rules, the plaintiffs had 30 days to file a responsive pleading. None of the above captioned plaintiffs filed a responsive pleading. At the expiration of the responsive pleading deadline, as is required 1 Pursuant to the “Settlement Agreement,” Exhibit A to CMO 60, plaintiffs enrolled in the Gallbladder Resolution Program are required to submit to the Claims Administrator all the Claim Package Materials identified in Section 3.03(a) of the Settlement Agreement. Section 3.01 of the Settlement Agreement fixed November 18, 2013 as the deadline for submission of a complete Claims Package. The subject motion asserts that the plaintiffs have failed to comply with this requirement. 2 under CMO 60, the motion was considered by Special Master Stephen Saltzburg. 2 On March 25, 2015, Special Master’s Saltzburg’s report and recommendation relating to the above captioned cases was docketed. In each case, Special Master Saltzburg found that the subject plaintiffs failed to comply with the requirements of CMO 60 and recommended that the subject plaintiffs’ claims be dismissed with prejudice in accord with the requirements of CMO 60. The parties were given 14 days to respond or object to Special Master Saltzburg’s report and recommendation. The deadline for responding or objecting to the Special Master’s report has expired. None of the above captioned plaintiffs have responded or objected. Upon consideration of Bayer’s motion to dismiss, the Special Master’s report, and the requirements of CMO 60, the Court finds that the above captioned 2 Section VIII of CMO 60 “appoints Professor Stephen Saltzburg as Special Master to hear motions to dismiss claims that fail to comply with the terms of the Agreement, and to recommend to this Court rulings on such motions, as specified in the Agreement” (Doc. 2739 p. 8). 3 plaintiffs have failed to comply with CMO 60. Accordingly, the claims of the above captioned plaintiffs are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. FURTHER, the Court directs the Clerk of the Court to enter judgment reflecting the same. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed this 14th day of April, 2015. Digitally signed by David R. Herndon Date: 2015.04.14 16:20:56 -05'00' United States District Court 4

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?