Alexander v. Boone Hospital Center et al.

Filing 59

ORDER granting 52 Motion to Sever; granting 52 Motion to Transfer/Change Venue; granting 58 Motion to Dismiss/General (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 6/22/11. (ds)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA IN RE MEDTRONIC, INC. SPRINT FIDELIS LEADS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION This documents relates to: Alexander v. Boone Hospital Center et al. 10-cv-03373 MDL NO. 08-1905 (RHK/JSM) ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ LEAD COUNSEL’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND TO SEVER, AND SUGGESTION OF REMAND Upon consideration of Plaintiffs’ Lead Counsel’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 58) and Plaintiff Donald Alexander’s Motion to Sever and Remand Remaining Defendants (Doc. No. 52), and based on all the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS ORDERED that the Motions are GRANTED. Pursuant to the Master Settlement Agreement and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 41(a), the claims of Plaintiff Donald Alexander in the action styled Alexander v. Boone Hospital Center et al., Civ. No. 10-cv-03373, against Medtronic, Inc., William A. Hawkins, Susan Alpert, Kathleen Erickson DiGiorno, Stephen Oesterle, Gary Ellis, and Brian Rysdam are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Court having expressly determined that there is no just reason for delay for entering judgment as to the dismissed claims, LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY as to those claims. The Court believes that the remaining claims against non-Medtronic Defendants Boone Hospital Center, Daniel Rothery, Missy Arnold, and Nancy Tune should be remanded by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) to the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri, the transferor court, for further proceedings, and it hereby SUGGESTS the same to the JPML. See JPML R. 10.1(b)(i). Dated: June 22, 2011 s/ Richard H. Kyle RICHARD H. KYLE 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?