James v. McKesson Corporation et al

Filing 22

ORDER granting 21 Motion to Dismiss without prejudice. Signed by Chief Judge David R. Herndon on 9/23/2011. (dsw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
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
ORDER

This Document Relates to:
Nicole Brink v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al.

No. 3:11-cv-10400-DRH-PMF

Ashley Harvey v. McKesson Corp., et al.

No. 3:10-cv-20438-DRH-PMF

Melissa Hicks-Nieli v. McKesson Corp., et al.

No. 3:10-cv-20385-DRH-PMF

Chinella Hill v. McKesson Corp., et al.

No. 3:10-cv-20391-DRH-PMF

Karen James v. McKesson Corp., et al.

No. 3:10-cv-20373-DRH-PMF

Latonya Studdard v. McKesson Corp., et al.

No. 3:10-cv-20448-DRH-PMF

ORDER GRANTING
MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc. (“Bayer”) motion for an Order dismissing plaintiffs’ claims
without prejudice for failure to file an appearance as required by Local Rule
83.1(g)(2).
On July 11, 2011, the Court granted motions to withdraw filed by plaintiffs’
counsel in the Harvey, Hicks-Nieli, Hill, James, and Studdard matters. (Harvey
Doc. 19; Hicks-Nieli Doc. 17; Hill Doc. 18; James Doc. 19; Studdard Doc. 18.)
On July 12, 2011, the Court granted a motion to withdraw filed by plaintiff’s

counsel in the Brink matter. (Brink Doc. 13.) The Orders provided that, “[i]f
plaintiff or her new counsel fails to file a supplementary entry of appearance
within 21 days of the entry of this Order, plaintiff’s action will be subject to
dismissal without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for
failure to prosecute or to comply with the orders of this Court including failure to
comply with the Plaintiff Fact Sheet requirements.” To date, and in violation of
the Order and Local Rule 83.1(g), plaintiffs have not filed a supplementary
appearance and have not served completed Plaintiff Fact Sheets as required by
Case Management Order 12.
Plaintiffs must comply with the Local Rules and this Court’s orders. Fed.
R. Civ. P. 41(b).

In addition, plaintiffs’ failure to file an appearance has

prejudiced Bayer. The Plaintiff Fact Sheets in the above captioned actions were
due on or before July 8, 2011.1 Ms. Hicks-Nieli served a substantially incomplete
Plaintiff Fact Sheet and has failed to address the deficiencies identified by Bayer. 2

1

Bayer answered the Brink complaint on May 24, 2011. (Brink Doc. 4.) Bayer
answered the Harvey complaint on April 6, 2011 (Harvey Doc. 17), and it sent
Plaintiff’s counsel a Plaintiff Fact Sheet delinquency letter on June 22, 2011.
Bayer answered the Hill complaint on April 7, 2011 (Hill Doc. 15), and it sent
Plaintiff’s counsel a Plaintiff Fact Sheet delinquency letter on June 22, 2011.
Bayer answered the James complaint on April 6, 2011 (James Doc. 17), and it
sent Plaintiff’s counsel a Plaintiff Fact Sheet delinquency letter on June 22, 2011.
Bayer answered the Studdard complaint on April 7, 2011 (Studdard Doc. 16),
and it sent Plaintiff’s counsel a Plaintiff Fact Sheet delinquency letter on June 22,
2011.
2

Bayer answered the Hicks-Nieli complaint on March 10, 2011 (Hicks-Nieli
Doc. 15), and it sent Plaintiff’s counsel a Plaintiff Fact Sheet delinquency letter on
May 23, 2011. Bayer received a fact sheet on May 31, 2011, but it was not
substantially complete. Bayer sent Plaintiff’s counsel a notice of delinquencies on
2

None of the remaining plaintiffs has served Bayer with the required Plaintiff Fact
Sheets. Plaintiffs properly completed Fact Sheets are now more than two months
overdue.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated herein, plaintiffs’ actions are hereby
dismissed without prejudice.
SO ORDERED.

Digitally signed by David
R. Herndon
Date: 2011.09.23 09:36:43
-05'00'
Chief Judge
United States District Court

Date: September 23, 2011

June 10, 2011. Plaintiff’s counsel moved to withdraw on July 1, 2011 (HicksNieli Doc. 16) and, as noted above, that motion was granted on July 11, 2011. To
date, Plaintiff has not cured the delinquencies.
3