In re Novartis and Par Antitrust Litigation

Filing 367

ORDER REGULATING MOTIONS BEFORE TRIAL: I respond to the parties' suggestions in their joint letter of September 3, 2021. I rule as follows: Plaintiff's suggestion of Daubert motions only with respect to class certification motions will create additional work and engage the court in resolving unnecessary disputes regarding the substance and consequences of experts' testimony and declarations. The suggestions of both parties favoring simultaneous Daubert and Class and Summary Judgment motions also are denied. I favor the following sequence following the close of expert depositions on December 31, 2021: a. Submission of any and all Daubert motions as to all expert's declarations and testimony. I would like these motions to be decided by the end of February. The parties shall propose filing dates consistent with that schedule. b. Plaintiffs to file motions for certification of classes. I would like to have these decided by the end of April, plus another week for regulating the terms of the proposed notices. c. Summary Judgment motions to be filed with three briefing dates: filing, oppositions and replies. I would like to decide these by the end of July 2022. d. Trial to begin November 7, 2022 with five weeks allotted. Final Pre-Trial Conference to take place October 27, 2022 at 2:00 pm. Motions in limine will be decided at or before the conference, with briefing to contemplate submissions of all briefs one week before the conference. If this schedule is practical, the parties shall submit consistent details for an order. SO ORDERED., ( Deposition due by 12/31/2021., Ready for Trial by 11/7/2022., Final Pretrial Conference set for 10/27/2022 at 02:00 PM before Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein.) (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 9/09/2021) (ama)

Download PDF
Case 1:18-cv-04361-AKH Document 367 Filed 09/09/21 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------- X : IN RE NOVARTIS AND PAR ANTITRUST : LITIGATION, : : : : : : : : : : -------------------------------------------------------------- X ORDER REGULATING MOTIONS BEFORE TRIAL 18 Civ. 4361 (AKH) ALVIN K. HELLERSTEIN, U.S.D.J.: I respond to the parties’ suggestions in their joint letter of September 3, 2021. I rule as follows: 1. Plaintiff’s suggestion of Daubert motions only with respect to class certification motions will create additional work and engage the court in resolving unnecessary disputes regarding the substance and consequences of experts’ testimony and declarations. The suggestions of both parties favoring simultaneous Daubert and Class and Summary Judgment motions also are denied. 2. I favor the following sequence following the close of expert depositions on December 31, 2021: a. Submission of any and all Daubert motions as to all expert’s declarations and testimony. I would like these motions to be decided by the end of February. The parties shall propose filing dates consistent with that schedule. Case 1:18-cv-04361-AKH Document 367 Filed 09/09/21 Page 2 of 2 b. Plaintiffs to file motions for certification of classes. I would like to have these decided by the end of April, plus another week for regulating the terms of the proposed notices. c. Summary Judgment motions to be filed with three briefing dates: filing, oppositions and replies. I would like to decide these by the end of July 2022. d. Trial to begin November 7, 2022 with five weeks allotted. Final Pre-Trial Conference to take place October 27, 2022 at 2:00 pm. Motions in limine will be decided at or before the conference, with briefing to contemplate submissions of all briefs one week before the conference. 3. If this schedule is practical, the parties shall submit consistent details for an order. SO ORDERED. Dated: September 9, 2021 New York, New York /s/ Alvin K. Hellerstein ALVIN K. HELLERSTEIN United States District Judge 2

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?