Booth v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. et al

Filing 84

ORDER AND REASONS: denying 82 Motions to Continue All Scheduling Deadlines and to Refrain from Ruling on Dispositive Motions Pending the Completion of General Causation Discovery, as stated herein. Signed by Judge Jane Triche Milazzo on 08/11/2022. (Reference: 17-3053)(am)

Download PDF
Case 2:17-cv-03053-JTM-JVM Document 84 Filed 08/11/22 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LATONYA SHERELL ANDERSON CIVIL ACTION NO. 17-3022 VERSUS Also filed in: 17-3132, 17-3516, 17-3628, 173310, 17- 3598, 173053, 17-3125, 173443, 17-3499, 173647, 17-3265, 174367, 17-4453 BP EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION, INC. ET AL. SECTION: “H” ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court are identical motions from 14 different Plaintiffs. Each Plaintiff filed a Motion to Continue All Scheduling Deadlines and to Refrain from Ruling on Dispositive Motions Pending the Completion of General Causation Discovery. Defendants BP Exploration & Production, Inc.; BP America Production Company; and BP p.l.c. (collectively, “BP”) oppose. These 14 Plaintiffs are among the “B3 bundle” of cases arising out of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.1 This bundle comprises “claims for personal injury See In Re: Oil Spill by the Oil Rig “Deepwater Horizon” in the Gulf of Mexico, on April 20, 2010, No. 10-md-02179, R. Doc. 26924 at 1 (E.D. La. Feb. 23, 2021). 1 1 Case 2:17-cv-03053-JTM-JVM Document 84 Filed 08/11/22 Page 2 of 3 and wrongful death due to exposure to oil and/or other chemicals used during the oil spill response (e.g., dispersant).”2 These cases were originally part of a multidistrict litigation (“MDL”) pending in the Eastern District of Louisiana before Judge Barbier. During this MDL, Judge Barbier approved the Deepwater Horizon Medical Benefits Class Action Settlement Agreement, but the B3 plaintiffs either opted out of this agreement or were excluded from its class definition.3 Subsequently, Judge Barbier severed the B3 cases from the MDL to be reallocated among the judges of this Court.4 The above 14 cases were reassigned to Section H.5 Plaintiffs ask the Court to continue all deadlines in their respective scheduling orders until their counsel has concluded discovery on BP’s alleged failure to conduct dermal monitoring and biomonitoring on the oil spill response workers. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b), a scheduling order “may be modified only for good cause and with the judge’s consent.” Here, the Court finds that the need for additional discovery does not constitute good cause for extending all deadlines in each scheduling order. Plaintiffs’ Motions also request that, in light of pending discovery issues in the case of Torres-Lugo v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc., No. 20-210, the Court should refrain from addressing any pending dispositive motions submitted by BP. However, the Court finds that the outcome of the additional discovery in Torres-Lugo does not affect the issues presented in many of BP’s pending motions. Id. Id. at 2 n.3. 4 Id. at 7–8. 5 See Doc. 7. 2 3 Case 2:17-cv-03053-JTM-JVM Document 84 Filed 08/11/22 Page 3 of 3 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Motions to Continue All Scheduling Deadlines and to Refrain from Ruling on Dispositive Motions Pending the Completion of General Causation Discovery are DENIED in the following cases: Case No. Case Name Doc. # 17-3132 Cotton v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc., et al. Doc. 58 17-3516 Brown v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. et al Doc. 79 17-3022 Anderson v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. et al Doc. 60 17-3628 Aubert v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. et al Doc. 50 17-3310 Joiner v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. et al Doc. 52 17-3598 Peschlow v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. et al Doc. 44 17-3053 Booth v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. et al Doc. 82 17-3125 Charles v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. et al Doc. 50 17-3443 Abdelfattah v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. et al Doc. 48 17-3499 Boler v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. et al Doc. 50 17-3647 Colbert v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. et al Doc. 72 17-3265 Harris v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. et al Doc. 47 17-4367 Jenkins v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. et al Doc. 60 17-4453 Moore v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc. et al Doc. 51 New Orleans, Louisiana this 11th day of August, 2022. ____________________________________ JANE TRICHE MILAZZO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?