Lege et al v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals Inc et al

Filing 34

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER NUMBER 25 (12-MD-2385 Doc. 113). Pursuant to CMO No. 25, 4 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim is WITHDRAWN. FURTHER, the following CLAIMS of the Plaintiff are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE: Manufacturing Defect; Negl igence; Negligence Per Se; Gross Negligence; Breach of Implied Warranty of Merchantability; Breach of Implied Warranty of Fitness for Particular Purpose; Breach of Implied Warranty of Ordinary Use; Misrepresentation, Suppression of Evidence and Fraud (including Negligent Misrepresentation); Redhibition; Deceptive Trade Practices; and request for Punitive Damages. Signed by Chief Judge David R. Herndon on 2/22/2013. (dsw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
)
IN RE: PRADAXA (DABIGATRAN
ETEXILATE) PRODUCTS LIABILITY
LITIGATION

)

3:12-md-02385-DRH-SCW

)

MDL No. 2385

)
)
)

This Document Relates to:
ALL CASES 1
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER NO. 25
LIFTING RESPONSIVE PLEADING STAY IN ALL CASES AND RESOLVING
PENDING MATTERS IN CERTAIN CASES THAT WERE SUBJECT TO
PREVIOUSLY ENTERED RESPONSIVE PLEADING STAY(S)
Herndon, Chief Judge:
I. Vacating Responsive Pleading Stay(s)
On September 12, 2012, the Court issued an order staying all pending
motions, including responsive pleading deadlines (12-md-2385 Doc. 25). The Court

1

Section I of this Order, Vacating Responsive Pleading Stay(s), is applicable to all cases. Section II
of this order is applicable to those cases specifically identified in section II. To ensure there is no
confusion regarding the resolution of motions and issues identified in section II, this Order shall
be docketed in the Master Case File and additionally in the individual member actions listed in
section II.

1

has also issued responsive pleading stays in individual member actions for motions
filed after September 12, 2012 (See 12-cv-60024-DRH-SCW Doc. 24; 12-cv-60091
Doc. 17). The parties have had an opportunity to confer regarding this matter and
the Court has determined that the responsive pleading stay is no longer necessary.
Accordingly, the Court hereby vacates any and all responsive pleading stays
previously issued. All pleadings filed after entry of this order will be subject to the
applicable responsive pleading deadlines provided for in the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, the Local Rules of this Court, and orders entered by the Undersigned
Judge.
The Court reminds the parties that that when deadlines provided by
CM/ECF conflict with orders of this Court, the Court ordered deadline will
always control. See United States District Court for the Southern District of
Illinois, Electronic Filing Rules, Rule 3 (The “filer is responsible for calculating
the response time under the federal and/or local rules. The date generated by
CM/ECF is a guideline only, and, if the Court has ordered the response to be
filed on a date certain, the Court's order governs the response deadline.”). The
deadlines provided by CM/ECF are generated automatically based on the generic
responsive pleading times allowed under the rules and do not consider special
circumstances (such as court orders specific to a particular case or issue).

2

II. CASE SPECIFIC MATTERS
This Section is Applicable to the Following Member Actions:
Richard Herbeck and
Shirley Herbeck

v.

Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
et al.

MDL No. 3:12-cv50004

Robert Stout

v.

Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
et al.

MDL No. 3:12-cv50008

Mark A. Jackson, on
behalf of himself and
those similarly situated,

v.

Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
et al.

MDL No. 3:12-cv60004

Bobby D. Sessoms and
Ruby J. Sessoms

v.

Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
et al.

MDL No. 3:12-cv60012

Helen Jean and John
Edward Hawkins

v.

Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
et al.

MDL No. 3:12-cv60021

v.
Janet Cornelius,
Individually and as the
Administratrix of the
Estate of Floyd Cornelius

Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
et al.

MDL No. 3:12-cv60022

Thelma Hawthorne

v.

Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
et al.

MDL No. 3:12-cv60024

Garland James Lege and
Patricia A. Lege

v.

Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
et al.

MDL No. 3:12-cv60025

3

Jerald R. Radcliff and
Debbie Radcliff

v.

Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
et al.
Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
et al.

MDL No. 3:12-cv60026

Bertha Bivens, as Next of
Kin Estate of Nancy
Brummett, Deceased

v.

Edward Stair, Jr.

v.

Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
et al.
Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
et al.

MDL No. 3:12-cv60028

Marlene Wright,
Individually and on
Behalf of the Estate of
Gertrude Eubanks,
Deceased

v.

Vanessa Meuse

v.

Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
et al.

MDL No. 3:12-cv60072

Robert W Geske, Jr. and
Olvia Geske

v.

Tedros Kebede, et al.

MDL No. 3:12-cv60091

MDL No. 3:12-cv60027

MDL No. 3:12-cv60030

Pending before the Court are various motions filed by Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“BIPI”) and/or Plaintiff(s) that were subject to the Court’s
responsive pleading stay(s). Certain motions, identified below, were filed by the
parties but not ruled on in the Southern District of Illinois and/or other transferor
courts prior to the creation of MDL No. 2385. The Court finds, and the parties

4

agree, that the following matters be briefed and/or resolved pursuant to the following
terms. Accordingly, the Court hereby orders as follows:
Case Name/
MDL & Transferor Court Docket
#
Richard Herbeck & Shirley
Herbeck

ORDER
Docket #10 (Motion to Dismiss for Failure to
State a Claim, filed 6/5/2012) is withdrawn.

MDL No. 3:12-cv-50004
ILS/3:12cv613
Robert Stout
MDL No. 3:12-cv-50008
ILS/3:12cv617
Mark A. Jackson, on behalf of
himself and those similarly
situated,
MDL No. 3:12-cv-60004
LAE/2:12cv1389
Bobby D. Sessoms & Ruby J.
Sessoms

Docket #11 (Motion to Dismiss for Failure to
State a Claim, filed 7/6/2012) is withdrawn.

BIPI may file a Reply in Support of its Motion to
Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and, in the
Alternative, Rule 12(f) Motion to Strike within 14
days of the entry of this Order. See S.D. Illinois
L.R. 7.1(c), (d).
Docket #6 (Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State
a Claim, filed 7/6/2012) is withdrawn.

MDL No. 3:12-cv-60012
SC/2:12cv01698

5

Helen Jean & John Edward
Hawkins
MDL No. 3:12-cv-60021
KYE/6:12cv45

Docket #7 (Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State
a Claim, filed 4/2/2012) is withdrawn, and the
following claims of the Plaintiff are dismissed
without prejudice: Manufacturing Defect,
Negligence Per Se, Breach of Warranty of
“Ordinary Use” and allegations of joint and
several liability.

Janet Cornelius, Individually and Docket #9 (Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State
as the Administratrix of the Estate a Claim, filed 4/24/2012) is withdrawn, and the
of Floyd Cornelius
following claims of the Plaintiff are dismissed
without prejudice: Manufacturing Defect,
MDL No. 3:12-cv-60022
Negligence Per Se, Breach of Warranty of
KYE/6:12cv64
“Ordinary Use” and allegations of joint and
several liability.
Thelma Hawthorne

Docket # 22 (Motion to Dismiss Filed by Thelma
Hawthorne on 12/21/2012). Responsive pleading
is due within 14 days of the entry of this Order.

MDL No. 3:12-cv-60024
LAE/2:12cv1203
Garland James Lege & Patricia A. Docket #4 (Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State
Lege
a Claim, filed 4/3/2012), is withdrawn, and the
following claims of the Plaintiff are dismissed
MDL No. 3:12-cv-60025
without prejudice: Manufacturing Defect;
LAW/6:12cv572
Negligence; Negligence Per Se; Gross Negligence;
Breach of Implied Warranty of Merchantability;
Breach of Implied Warranty of Fitness for
Particular Purpose; Breach of Implied Warranty
of “Ordinary Use;” Misrepresentation,
Suppression of Evidence and Fraud (including
Negligent Misrepresentation); Redhibition;
Deceptive Trade Practices; and request for
Punitive Damages.
Jerald R. Radcliff & Debbie
Radcliff
MDL No. 3:12-cv-60026
OKW/5:12cv266

Docket #9 (Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State
a Claim, filed 4/6/2012) is withdrawn, and the
following claims of the Plaintiff are dismissed
without prejudice: Manufacturing Defect,
Negligence Per Se, Breach of Warranty of
“Ordinary Use” and allegations of joint and
several liability.

6

Bertha Bivens, as Next of Kin
Estate of Nancy Brummett,
Deceased
MDL No. 3:12-cv-60027
TNE/3:12cv103

Edward Stair, Jr.
MDL No. 3:12-cv-60028
TNE/3:12cv116

Marlene Wright, Individually and
on Behalf of the Estate of
Gertrude Eubanks, Deceased
MDL No. 3:12-cv-60030
TNW/2:12cv2262

Docket #8 (Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State
a Claim, filed 4/2/2012) is withdrawn, and the
following claims of the Plaintiff are dismissed
without prejudice: Manufacturing Defect,
Negligence Per Se, Breach of Warranty of
“Ordinary Use;” Tennessee Consumer Protection
Act; claims brought on behalf of Plaintiff on an
individual basis; and any request for prejudgment
interest.
Docket #6 (Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State
a Claim, filed 4/9/2012) is withdrawn, and the
following claims of the Plaintiff are dismissed
without prejudice: Manufacturing Defect,
Negligence Per Se, Breach of Warranty of
“Ordinary Use;” Tennessee Consumer Protection
Act; and any request for prejudgment interest.
Docket #7 (Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State
a Claim, filed 5/9/2012) is withdrawn, and the
following claims of the Plaintiff are dismissed
without prejudice: Manufacturing Defect,
Suppression of Evidence and Fraud, claims
brought on behalf of Plaintiff on an individual
basis, and any request for prejudgment interest.
Docket #10 (Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File
First Amended Complaint, filed 6/6/2012) is
granted, subject to dismissal of the claims listed
above.

Vanessa Meuse
MDL No. 3:12-cv-60072
FLM/ 3:12-cv-968-J-99
Robert W. Geske, Jr. & Olivia
Geske
MDL No. 3:12-cv-60091
NVD/ 2:12cv1932

Docket # 8 (Motion to Vacate Order Striking
Complaint filed by Vanessa Meuse on 9/24/2012).
Responsive pleading is due within 14 days of the
entry of this Order.
Docket # 16 (Motion to Dismiss filed by
Boehringer Ingelheim Corporation on 12/3/2012).
Responsive pleading is due within 14 days of the
entry of this Order.

7

The Court further orders that BIPI shall have 60 days from the entry of this
Order to file an Answer in any of the above-referenced actions in which a responsive
pleading is otherwise required.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Digitally signed by
David R. Herndon
Date: 2013.02.22
09:59:08 -06'00'
Chief Judge
United States District Court

Date: February 22, 2013

8