Guerin et al v. Bayer Corporation et al

Filing 14

ORDER granting 13 Motion to Dismiss. The claims plaintiff Shaunda Cantrell are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to comply with Plaintiff Fact Sheet Requirements. FURTHER, the Court DIRECTS 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 5/20/2013. (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:
Alicia Guerin, et al. v. Bayer Corp,
et al. 1
Samantha Hamrick, et al. v.
Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals,
Inc., et al. 2

5
6
7

No. 3:11-cv-13232-DRH-PMF

Heshima Worthington, et al. v.
Bayer Pharmaceuticals Corp., et al. 7

4

No. 3:11-cv-12404-DRH-PMF

Sheila Woodard, et al. v. Bayer Corp,
et al. 6

3

No. 3:11-cv-12280-DRH-PMF

Heather Ward, et al. v.
Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals,
Inc., et al. 5

This
This
This
This
This
This
This

No. 3:11-cv-12333-DRH-PMF

Lauren Terry, et al. v. Bayer Corp,
et al. 4

2

No. 3:11-cv-12806-DRH-PMF

Yvonne Richardson Campbell, et al. v.
Bayer Corp., et al. 3

1

No. 3:11-cv-13233-DRH-PMF

No. 3:11-cv-12959-DRH-PMF

order applies
order applies
order applies
order applies
order applies
order applies
order applies

only to plaintiff Shaunda Cantrell.
only to plaintiff Katie King.
only to plaintiff Billie Jo Goodfellow.
only to plaintiff Courtney Hernandez.
only to plaintiff Stephanie Wood.
only to plaintiff Gina Vona.
only to plaintiff Heshima Worthington and her spouse, Christopher Atkinson.

ORDER DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE
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. 8
On June 29, 2012, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. moved to
dismiss the above captioned matters without prejudice for failure to comply with
PFS obligations. 9 The Court granted the motion on August 20, 2012. 10
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.” 11
On March 27, 2013, more than 60 days after the entry of the order of
dismissal without prejudice, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. filed the

8

The motion to dismiss filed by Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. on March 27, 2013 sought
dismissal of certain plaintiffs in 30 member actions. This order addresses the multi-plaintiff
actions where no responsive pleading was filed. The single plaintiff actions (including actions
involving consortium claims) and the member actions where a responsive pleading was filed are
addressed in separate orders.
9

Guerin, et al. DOC. 10; Hamrick, et al. DOC. 6; Richardson Campbell, et al. DOC. 6; Terry, et al.
DOC. 6; Ward, et al. DOC. 6; Woodard, et al. DOC. 9; Worthington, et al. DOC. 6.

10

Guerin, et al. DOC. 11; Hamrick, et al. DOC. 7; Richardson Campbell, et al. DOC. 7; Terry, et
al. DOC. 7; Ward, et al. DOC. 7; Woodard, et al. DOC. 10; Worthington, et al. DOC. 7.
11

Guerin, et al. DOC. 11; Hamrick, et al. DOC. 7; Richardson Campbell, et al. DOC. 7; Terry, et al.
DOC. 7; Ward, et al. DOC. 7; Woodard, et al. DOC. 10; Worthington, et al. DOC. 7 (emphasis in
original).

subject motion stating that the specified 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,
The Court notes that, pursuant to Section E of CMO 12, “[u]nless Plaintiff
has served Defendants with a completed PFS or has moved to vacate the
dismissal without prejudice within 60 days after entry of any such Order of
Dismissal without Prejudice, the order will be converted to a Dismissal With
Prejudice upon Defendants’ motion.” (MDL 2100 Doc. 836) (emphasis added).
Accordingly, the Court could have immediately converted the above captioned
dismissals to dismissals with prejudice on March 27, 2013, the day Bayer
HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. filed the subject motion. More than 30 days have
passed since Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc.’s motion was filed. Thus, the
plaintiffs have had ample time to cure the any PFS deficiencies and avoid a with
prejudice dismissal of their claims.
Having considered the motion and the relevant provisions of CMO 12 the
Court ORDERS as follows:
The specified 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 CMO 12. Accordingly, pursuant to Section E of CMO 12, the claims of the
specified plaintiffs in the above captioned actions 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 above captioned cases.
SO ORDERED:

Digitally signed by
David R. Herndon
Date: 2013.05.20
13:47:39 -05'00'
Chief Judge
United States District Court

Date: May 20, 2013