Miller v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al

Filing 22

ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 03/19/2015. (cjo)

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:
Krystal Broodie-Stewart v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.

No. 3:12-cv-10145-DRH-PMF

Nancy Miller v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.

No. 3:10-cv-20509-DRH-PMF

Debra Rae Stump v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.

No. 3:12-cv-10158-DRH-PMF

Chyleen Phillips v. Bayer Corporation, et al.

No. 3:12-cv-11049-DRH-PMF

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
(Failure To Comply With PFS Obligations)
HERNDON, District Judge:
This matter is before the Court on the Bayer defendants’ motion, pursuant
to Case Management Order 12 (“CMO 12”) 1 for an order of dismissal, without
prejudice, of the plaintiffs’ claims in the above captioned cases for failure to
comply with Plaintiff Fact Sheet (“PFS”) obligations.
Under Section C of CMO 12, each plaintiff is required to serve defendants
with a completed PFS, including a signed declaration, executed record release
authorizations, and copies of all documents subject to the requests for production

1

The parties negotiated and agreed to CMO 12, which expressly provides that the discovery
required of plaintiffs is not objectionable. CMO 12 § A(2).

contained in the PFS which are in the possession of plaintiff. Section B of CMO
12 further provides that a completed PFS is due “45 days from the date of service
of the first answer to her Complaint or the docketing of her case in this MDL, or
45 days from the date of this Order, whichever is later.”
Accordingly, Plaintiffs in the above-captioned matter were to have served
complete Fact Sheets in June 2012 (Broodie-Stewart and Stump), January 2011
(Miller), and November 2012 (Phillips). Notice of Overdue Discovery was sent in
October 2012 (Broodie-Stewart), February 2011 (Miller), July 2012 (Stump), and
December 2012 (Phillips). As of the filing of Bayer’s motion to dismiss, Bayer still
had not received completed PFS materials from the plaintiffs in the abovecaptioned matters.
Under Section E of CMO 12, the plaintiffs were given 14 days from the
date of Bayer’s motion to file a response either certifying that they served upon
defendants and defendants received a completed PFS, and attaching appropriate
documentation of receipt or an opposition to defendant’s motion.
To date, none of the plaintiffs in the above captioned member actions has
filed a response. Because the plaintiffs have failed to respond to Bayer’s
allegations, the Court finds that these plaintiffs have failed to comply with their
PFS obligations under CMO 12. Accordingly, the above captioned cases are
dismissed without prejudice.
The Court reminds plaintiffs that, pursuant to CMO 12 Section E, unless
plaintiffs serve the defendants with a COMPLETED PFS or move to vacate the

2

dismissal without prejudice within 60 days after entry of this Order, the
Order will be converted to a Dismissal With Prejudice upon defendants’
motion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 19th day of March, 2015.

Digitally signed
by David R.
Herndon
Date: 2015.03.19
15:14:28 -05'00'
United States District Judge

3