Moody v. American Medical Systems Inc et al
| Sandra Moody |
| American Medical Systems Inc, American Medical Systems Holdings Inc, Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc, Endo Pharmaceuticals Holdings Inc and Endo Health Solutions Inc |
| 1:2025cv01397 |
| September 19, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Colin Stirling Bruce |
| Eric I Long |
| Personal Inj. Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Product Liability |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 10, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
TEXT ORDER entered by Magistrate Judge Eric I. Long on 3/10/2026. Pursuant to Notice of Voluntary Dismissal #6 and Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this matter is hereby terminated. All pending motions are denied as moot and all scheduled deadlines and court settings are vacated. (BL)
|
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Sandra Moody. (Brenes, Troy) |
| Filing 5 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS entered by Magistrate Judge Eric I. Long on 3/4/2026: The Court recommends that Plaintiff's case be DISMISSED for failure to prosecute pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Objections to R&R due by 3/18/2026. (BL) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER to Show Cause entered by Magistrate Judge Eric I. Long on 2/10/2026. Therefore, the Court orders Plaintiffs to show cause as to why this matter should not be dismissed for failing to serve the summons pursuant to Rule 4(m). Plaintiffs have 14 days from the entry of this order to comply. SEE WRITTEN ORDER. (BL)
|
|
TEXT ONLY ORDER: Pursuant Plaintiff's #3 Response to Show Cause Order stating this case was inadvertently filed in the wrong location and should be transferred to the Urbana Division of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois, Clerk is directed to TRANSFER this case to the Urbana Division. See Civil LR 40.1(D). Entered by Judge Michael M. Mihm on 10/07/2025. (BL)
|
| Filing 3 RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Sandra Moody . (Brenes, Troy) |
| Filing 2 Summons Issued as to All Defendants. Original summons returned to Plaintiff's counsel. (BL) |
|
TEXT ORDER: Plaintiff's Complaint alleges that "[t]his court has diversity jurisdiction over this matter as Plaintiff and Defendants are residents of diverse states[and] the amount in dispute in this case exceeds $75,000." (D. #1 , p. 3). The Complaint does not state in the case caption, or as part of the statement of jurisdiction, the basis for filing in the Peoria Division of this Court. See CDIL Civil LR 40.1(E)(1), (2). The Complaint states the Plaintiff is located in Tolono, Illinois, which is part of Champaign County and within the Urbana Division of this Court. See Civil LR 40.1(D). The Complaint also fails to state where the device was implanted. In light of this, the Plaintiff is ordered to show cause in writing, by 10/3/2025, addressing the issues set forth in this Order and stating why this case should not be transferred to the Urbana Division of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois. Entered by Judge Michael M. Mihm on 09/22/2025. (BL)
|
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against American Medical Systems Holdings, Inc., American Medical Systems Inc, Endo Health Solutions Inc., Endo Pharmaceuticals Holdings, Inc., Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number AILCDC-4831717.), filed by Sandra Moody. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons)(Brenes, Troy) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
