Bennefield et al v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al
Filing
12
ORDER granting 11 Motion to Dismiss the claims of plaintiffs Vera Channell, Priscilla Martinez, and Amanda Rasmussen WITH prejudice for failure to comply with CMO 12 (PFS Requirements). The claims of plaintiffs Vera Channell, Priscilla Martinez, and Amanda Rasmussen are dismissed WITH prejudice. The Court instructs the Clerk of the Court to enter judgment reflecting the same at the close of the case. Signed by Chief Judge David R. Herndon on 6/20/2013. (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
This Document Relates to:
Amanda Bennefield, et al. v.
No. 3:11-cv-11317-DRH-PMF
Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al. 1
Emily Jones, et al. v.
No. 3:11-cv-11320-DRH-PMF
Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al. 2
ORDER DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE
HERNDON, Chief Judge:
This matter is before the Court on the defendant Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc.’s motion, pursuant to Case Management Order 12 (“CMO
12”), for an order dismissing the plaintiffs’ claims, in the above-captioned
matters, with prejudice for failure to comply with Plaintiff Fact Sheet (“PFS”)
obligations.
On February 9, 2012, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. moved to
dismiss the above captioned matters without prejudice for failure to comply with
PFS obligations. The Court granted the motion on March 1, 2012
1
This motion applies only to plaintiffs Vera Channell, Priscilla Martinez, and
Amanda Rasmussen.
2
This motion applies only to plaintiffs Emily Jones and Jennifer Mighton.
In the order dismissing the above captioned actions, the Court warned the
plaintiffs that, “pursuant to CMO 12 Section E, unless plaintiffs serve
defendants with a COMPLETED PFS or move to vacate the dismissal without
prejudice within 60 days after entry of this Order, the Order will be
converted to a Dismissal With Prejudice upon defendants’ motion.”
On April 2, 2013, more than one year after the entry of the order of
dismissal without prejudice, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. filed the
subject motion, stating the plaintiffs are still not in compliance with their PFS
obligations and asking the Court to convert the dismissals to dismissals with
prejudice pursuant to Section E of CMO 12,
To date, none of the above captioned plaintiffs have taken any steps to cure
their PFS deficiencies, to address the without prejudice dismissal, or to reply to
the motion for dismissal with prejudice. The plaintiffs have had ample time to
cure the any PFS deficiencies and avoid a with prejudice dismissal.
Having considered the motion and the relevant provisions of CMO 12 the
Court ORDERS as follows:
The plaintiffs in the above captioned actions have failed to comply with
their obligations pursuant to CMO 12 and more than 60 days have passed since
the entry of the order of dismissal without prejudice for failure to comply with
2
CMO 12. Accordingly, pursuant to Section E of CMO 12, the plaintiffs’
complaints are hereby dismissed WITH prejudice.
Further, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of the Court to enter judgment
reflecting the same at the close of the case.
SO ORDERED:
David R. Herndon
2013.06.20
12:09:51 -05'00'
Chief Judge
United States District Court
Date: June 20, 2013
3
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?