Lewis v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc et al

Filing 12

ORDER DISMISSING CASE without prejudice. Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 7/22/15. (rah)

Download PDF
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: Parker-Lawnsby et al v. Bayer Corporation, et al. No. 3:11-cv-12099-DRH-PMF 1 Doherty v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al No. 3:12-cv-10231-DRH-PMF Redricks et al v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al No. 3:13-cv-10537DRH-PMF 2 Lewis v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al No. 3:13-cv-10566-DRH-PMF Glover v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al No. 3:13-cv-10640-DRH-PMF Bailog v. Bayer Corporation No. 3:14-cv-10368DRH-PMF Jones et al. v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al No. 3:14-cv-10162DRH-PMF 3 Banks et al. v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al No. 3:14-cv-10171DRH-PMF 4 1 This Order of dismissal applies only to plaintiff Brandi Manning’s claims. However, as all other plaintiffs have previously been dismissed, this matter will be dismissed in its entirety. 2 This Order of dismissal applies only to plaintiff Genise Key’s claims. 3 This Order of dismissal applies only to plaintiff Schkaylle Marshall’s claims. 4 This Order of dismissal applies only to plaintiff Megan Evans’ claims. Page 1 of 3 DeGrazia et al. v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al No. 3:14-cv-10215DRH-PMF 5 Goines et al. v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al No. 3:14-cv-10223DRH-PMF 6 Ellis et al. v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al No. 3:14-cv-10234-DRH-PMF7 ORDER GRANTING DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE HERNDON, District Judge: This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s (Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc.) 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). 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, the above captioned plaintiffs have not responded to the pending motions to dismiss. 5 6 7 This Order of dismissal applies only to plaintiff Christine DeGrazia's claims. This Order of dismissal applies only to plaintiff Sylvia Goines’ claims. This Order of dismissal applies only to plaintiff Stephanie Scroggins’ claims. Page 2 of 3 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. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to revise the dockets accordingly. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed this 22nd day of July, 2015. Digitally signed by David R. Herndon Date: 2015.07.22 12:52:19 -05'00' United States District Court Page 3 of 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?