American Sales Company, LLC v. Pfizer, Inc. et al

Filing 443

ORDER adopting 394 Report and Recommendations; granting in part 191 Motion to Certify Class by American Sales Company, LLC, Cesar Castillo, Inc., Rochester Drug Co-Operative, Inc.. This Court has reviewed the sound R&R (ECF No. 394) and hereb y ADOPTS and APPROVES in full the findings and recommendations set forth therein. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion to Certify Class (ECF No. 191) is GRANTED IN PART as follows: this Court CERTIFIES a class of thirty-tw o members comprised of those direct purchasers of Celebrex that purchased generic and/or brand-name versions of the drug during the class period as specified in the Report. The ten proposed members that purchased only generic forms of the drug, and the two proposed members that purchased brand-name Celebrex only after generic entry, are EXCLUDED from the class. Signed by District Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen and filed on 8/24/17. (tbro)

Download PDF
UNITED StATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Norfolk Division AMERICAN SALES COMPANY, LLC, on behalfofitselfand all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, V. Civil Action No. 2:14cv361 PFIZER, INC., etal. Defendants. ORDER This matter comes before the Court following the filing of Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification (ECF No. 191) and corresponding Memorandum in Support filed on April 5, 2017. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), this Court designated United States Magistrate Judge Douglas E. Miller to submit to the undersigned United States District Judge proposed findings of fact, if applicable, and a recommendation for the disposition of this Motion. See ECF No. 225. The parties were advised that any party could serve and file written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), and the Local Rules of this Court, within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the Magistrate Judge's report. The Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") regarding this motion on July 28,2017. ECF No. 394. The R&R concluded that Plaintiffs' Motion to Certify Class should be GRANTED IN PART, and that this Court should certify a class of thirty-two members comprised of those direct purchasers of Celebrex that purchased generic and/or brand-name versions of the drug during the 1 class period as specified in the Report. The Magistrate Judge further recommended that the ten proposed members that purchased only generic forms of the drug, and the two proposed members that purchased brand-name Celebrex only after generic entry, should be excluded from the class. The time for filing written objections has passed, and no party has filed objections. As indicated in the R&R, "failure to file timely objections to the findings and recommendations set forth [in the R&R] will result in waiver of right to appeal" from a judgment or rulings from this Court based on such findings and recommendations. Id. at 36. This Court has reviewed the sound R&R (ECF No. 394) and hereby ADOPTS and APPROVES in full the findings and recommendations set forth therein. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion to Certify Class (ECF No. 191) is GRANTED IN PART as follows: this Court CERTIFIES a class of thirty-two members comprised of those direct purchasers of Celebrex that purchased generic and/or brand-name versions of the drug during the class period as specified in the Report. The ten proposed members that purchased only generic forms of the drug, and the two proposed members that purchased brand-name Celebrex only after generic entry, are EXCLUDED from the class. The Clerk is DIRECTED to send a copy of this Order to all counsel of record and to Magistrate Judge Douglas E. Miller. IT IS SO ORDERED. Arenda^TT-Wright Allen United States District Judge Norfolk, Virginia 0^' ^^•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?