Ronald J. Streck v. Eli Lilly and Company, et al
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, STATE OF TEXAS, STATE OF NEW YORK and JOY P. CLAIRMONT |
| RONALD J. STRECK |
| ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, ASTELLAS PHARMA US, INC. and ROCHE LABORATORIES, INCORPORATED |
| 23-2216 |
| June 20, 2023 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
| False Claims Act |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 7, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 Docketing Statement filed by Appellant Ronald J. Streck. Prior or Related proceedings: Yes. 23-2134 [8] [7322182] [23-2216] (Miller, Daniel) [Entered: 07/07/2023 04:43 PM] |
Filing 7
ORDER: Appellant Ronald J. Streck is directed to file the overdue Docketing Statement within 14 days from the date of this Rule to Show Cause. Docketing statement response due for Appellant Ronald J. Streck by 07/19/2023. [7] [7321209] [23-2216] (AD) [Entered: 07/05/2023 11:08 AM]
|
| Filing 6 Jurisdictional memorandum filed by Appellee Ronald J. Streck in 23-2134 and Appellant Ronald J. Streck in 23-2216. [6] [7320283] [23-2134, 23-2216]--[Text edited 06/30/2023 by JR.] (Miller, Daniel) [Entered: 06/29/2023 11:40 AM] |
| Filing 5 Circuit Rule 26.1 Disclosure Statement and Appearance filed by Attorney Jonathan Z. DeSantis for Appellee Ronald J. Streck in 23-2134, Appellant Ronald J. Streck in 23-2216. [5] [7318856] (L-No; E-Yes; R-No) [23-2134, 23-2216] [5] [7318856] [23-2134, 23-2216]--[Edited 06/23/2023 by HTP to reflect addition of counsel.] (DeSantis, Jonathan) [Entered: 06/23/2023 10:20 AM] |
| Filing 4 Jurisdictional memorandum filed by Appellant Eli Lilly and Company in 23-2134, Appellee Eli Lilly and Company in 23-2216. [4] [7318494] [23-2134, 23-2216] (O'Quinn, John) [Entered: 06/21/2023 07:15 PM] |
|
Filing 3
ORDER: Appellant Ronald Streck shall file, on or before June 30, 2023, a brief memorandum stating why this cross-appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. A motion for voluntary dismissal pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 42(b) will satisfy this requirement. Briefing shall be SUSPENDED pending further court order. (See order for further details) DW [7318419] [3] [7318419] [23-2216] (PS) [Entered: 06/21/2023 03:03 PM]
|
| Filing 2 THIS CAUSE CONSISTS OF MORE THAN 5 PARTIES FOR EITHER SIDE. The following are those parties to this cause as reflected on the District Court docket, yet are not reflected on the Appellate docket/caption for administrative purposes: PLAINTIFFS: State of California, State of Colorado, State of Connecticut, State of Delaware, State of Florida, State of Georgia, State of Hawaii, State of Illinois, State of Indiana, State of Iowa, State of Louisiana, State of Maryland, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, State of Michigan, State of Minnesota, State of Montana, State of Nevada, State of New Jersey, State of New Mexico, State of North Carolina, State of Oklahoma, State of Rhode Island, State of Tennessee, Commonwealth of Virginia, State of Washington, State of Wisconsin and District of Columbia. APPELLEES: Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc., Actavis, LLC, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Celgene Corporation, Daiichi Sankyo, Inc., First Horizon Pharmaceutical Corporation, Jom Pharmaceutical Services, Inc., Merk & Co., Inc., Organon USA, Inc., Teva Pharmaceuticals, USA, Inc. and Santarus, Inc. [2] [7318255] [23-2216] (MAN) [Entered: 06/21/2023 11:10 AM] |
| Filing 1 U.S. civil case docketed. Fee paid. Docketing Statement due for Appellant Ronald J. Streck by 06/27/2023. Transcript information sheet due by 07/05/2023. Appellant's brief due on or before 07/31/2023 for Ronald J. Streck. [1] [7318244] [23-2216] (MAN) [Entered: 06/21/2023 10:58 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
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.
