Lyles v. Bayer Corporation et al

Filing 18

ORDER granting 17 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution. The action is dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 3/3/2015. (dsw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
------------------------------------------------------------

X

IN RE YASMIN AND YAZ (DROSPIRENONE)
MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND
PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

3:09-md-02100-DRH-PMF
MDL No. 2100

-----------------------------------------------------------Judge David R. Herndon

This Document Relates to:

Tara Montoya v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No.
3:10-cv-13482-DRH-PMF

Deborah Kirby v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No.
3:11-cv-12032-DRH-PMF

Tamia Baker v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No.
3:11-cv-12689-DRH-PMF

Sara Cusick v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:11-cv-12817DRH-PMF

Mary A. Mack v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:11-cv-13052DRH-PMF

Centrel Carter v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No.
3:11-cv-13075-DRH-PMF

Kelley Pinkerton v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:11-cv-13116DRH-PMF

Brianna Christine Lyles v. Bayer Corporation,
et al. No. 3:11-cv-20007-DRH-PMF
Phil Gallo, et al. v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:11-cv-20176DRH-PMF

Page 1 of 3

Maria Calderon v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No.
3:12-cv-10294-DRH-PMF

Gay Hunt v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No. 3:12cv-11024-DRH-PMF

Lauren Jessica Taylor v. Bayer Corporation, et
al. No. 3:12-cv-11483-DRH-PMF
Jennifer Hamilton Anderson v. Bayer
Corporation, et al. No. 3:12-cv-11570-DRHPMF

Addie Chadwell v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No.
3:13-cv-10045-DRH-PMF

Delfina Collier v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No.
3:13-cv-10630-DRH-PMF

Felicia Rosa v. Bayer HealthCare No.
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. 3:13-cv-10706DRH-PMF

Latika Threatt v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No.
3:13-cv-10791-DRH-PMF

Candyce Meeks v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. No. 3:13-cv-10815DRH-PMF

ORDER GRANTING DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
HERNDON, District Judge:
This matter is before the Court on the Bayer Defendants’ motions for an
order dismissing the above captioned plaintiffs’ claims without prejudice for
failure to file an appearance as required by this Court’s Order and Local Rule
83.1(g)(2).

Page 2 of 3

In each of the above captioned cases, the Court granted a motion to
withdraw filed by counsel. The orders granting leave to withdraw expressly
provided that if the subject plaintiff (or her new counsel) failed to file a timely
supplementary entry of appearance, the action would 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. To date, and in violation of
this Court’s orders and Local Rule 83.1(g), the above captioned plaintiffs have not
filed a supplementary appearance. In addition, none of the above captioned
plaintiffs have responded to the instant motion to dismiss.
The plaintiffs must comply with the Local Rules and this Court’s orders.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Accordingly, for the reasons stated herein, the claims of the
above captioned plaintiffs are hereby dismissed without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 3rd day of March, 2015.

Digitally signed by
David R. Herndon
Date: 2015.03.03
09:50:13 -06'00'
United States District Court

Page 3 of 3