COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION et al

Filing 124

MEMORANDUM AND/OR OPINION ORDER THAT DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON LABEL-BASED CLAIMS (DOC. NO. 64) AND DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON RESTITUTION (DOC. NO. 68) ARE GRANTED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE CYNTHIA M. RUFE ON 12/7/2017. 12/8/2017 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED TO LIAISON COUNSEL. (SEE PAPER # 5156 IN 07-MD-1871) (ems) **(FILED IN ERROR; DUPLICATE ENTRY)**Modified on 12/8/2017 (ems).

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN RE: AVANDIA MARKETING, SALES : PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS : LIABILITY LITIGATION : _______________________________________ : THIS DOCUMENT APPLIES TO: : : County of Santa Clara v. SmithKline : Beecham Corporation, doing business as : GlaxoSmithKline, L.L.C. : MDL NO. 1871 07-md-1871 10-CV-1637 ORDER AND NOW, this 7th day of December 2017, upon consideration of Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Label-Based Claims [Doc. No. 64], Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Restitution [Doc. No. 68], the responses and replies thereto, arguments made by counsel for the parties at the hearing held on February 3, 2017, and in accordance with the Memorandum Opinion issued this day, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motions [Doc. Nos. 64, 68] are GRANTED. It is so ORDERED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Cynthia M. Rufe, J. _____________________ CYNTHIA M. RUFE, J.

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?