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)

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