Dowdle et al v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al

Filing 7

ORDER, granting 6 MOTION for Order to Dismiss Without Prejudice -- Failure to Comply With CMO 12 - Plaintiff Holly Miller Only filed by Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Holly Miller terminated. Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 4/30/2015. (dsw)

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:
Jessica Bagley v. Bayer Corporation, et al.
Denise Cunningham, et al. v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. 1

No. 3:14-cv-10135-DRH-PMF

Kennedy Hernandez v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.

No. 3:14-cv-10118-DRH-PMF

Lauren Lannert v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.

No. 3:14-cv-10272-DRH-PMF

Ashley Mathis v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.

No. 3:14-cv-10112-DRH-PMF

Claudia Mendoza, et al. v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. 3

No. 3:13-cv-10519-DRH-PMF

Candice Mudgett, et al. v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. 4

No. 3:13-cv-10512-DRH-PMF

Tammie Pitts v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.

No. 3:14-cv-10142-DRH-PMF

Christi Sage, et al. v. Bayer HealthCare
This
This
3
This
4
This

No. 3:13-cv-10437-DRH-PMF

Tamarra Ferguson v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.

2

No. 3:14-cv-10196-DRH-PMF

Janelle Dowdle, et al. v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. 2

1

No. 3:11-cv-20153-DRH-PMF

No. 3:14-cv-10031-DRH-PMF

Order
Order
Order
Order

applies to Plaintiff Denise Cunningham only.
applies to Plaintiff Holly Miller only.
applies to Plaintiff Betty Lampton only.
applies to Plaintiff Candice Mudgett only.

Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. 5
Charlene Salinas, et al. v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. 6

No. 3:14-cv-10032-DRH-PMF

Amy Sutter, et al. v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.

No. 3:14-cv-20009-DRH-PMF

Suzanne L. Tipton v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.

No. 3:11-cv-10555-DRH-PMF

Linda Vondercrone v. Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.

No. 3:14-cv-10123-DRH-PMF

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
(Failure To Comply With PFS Obligations)
HERNDON, District Judge:
This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s (Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Inc.) motion, pursuant to Case Management Order 12 (“CMO
12”) 7 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
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

5

This Order applies to Plaintiff Tina Dee Will, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of
Kristina Kaye Chesney only.
6
This Order applies to Plaintiff Charity Bouza only.
7
The parties negotiated and agreed to CMO 12, which expressly provides that the discovery
required of plaintiffs is not objectionable. CMO 12 § A(2).

2

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, the plaintiffs in the above-captioned matters were to have
served completed PFSs between November of 2012 and December of 2014. Notice
of Overdue Discovery was sent on January 27, 2015. As of the filing of Bayer’s
motion to dismiss, Bayer still had not received completed PFS materials from the
plaintiffs in the above-captioned 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
dismissal without prejudice within 60 days after entry of this Order, the

3

Order will be converted to a Dismissal With Prejudice upon defendants’
motion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 30th day of April, 2015.

Digitally signed by
David R. Herndon
Date: 2015.04.30
14:25:49 -05'00'
United States District Court

4