CINTAO et al v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION
MEMORANDUM AND/OR OPINIONSIGNED BY HONORABLE RONALD L. BUCKWALTER ON 8/7/13. 8/8/13 ENTERED AND COPIES EMAILED.(rf, ) Modified on 8/8/2013 (rf, ).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
I.C., a Minor, by MARIA PINO and
THOMAS CINTAO, Guardians,
and MARIA PINO and THOMAS
Before the court is Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand. As Plaintiffs' counsel has pointed out,
there are nine cases having "the same exact remand issue." They are:
Kenney v. GSK, Civil Action No. 13-3675 (Judge Mitchell S. Goldberg)
Moore v. GSK, Civil Action No. 13-3676 (Judge Mitchell S. Goldberg)
Cammarota v. GSK, Civil Action No. 13-3677 (Judge John R. Padova)
Cintao v. GSK, Civil Action No. 13-3681 (Judge Ronald L. Buckwalter)
Staley v. GSK, Civil Action No. 13-3684 (Judge Mary A. McLaughlin)
Powell v. GSK, Civil Action No. 13-3693 (Judge Michael M. Baylson)
Rader v. GSK, Civil Action No. 13-3694 (Judge C. Darnell Jones II)
Nieman v. GSK, Civil Action No. 13-3695 (Judge Ronald L. Buckwalter)
Guddeck v. GSK, Civil Action No. 13-3696 (Judge Harvey Bartle III)
Recently, two judges of this court (Bartle and McLaughlin) have denied Plaintiffs'
Motion by opinions and orders dated July 24, 2013 and July 26, 2013. Having reviewed those
opinions as well as the briefs filed in this case, I too will deny the Motion to Remand.
AND NOW, this 71h day of August, 2013, upon consideration ofPlaintiffs' Motion to
Remand and Defendant's Response thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that said Motion (Docket
No. 4) is DENIED.
BY THE COURT:
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?