Kendrick v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals, U.S.A., Inc. et al
| David Kendrick |
| Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc., and Takeda Pharmaceuticals, U.S.A., Inc. |
| 1:2020cv06226 |
| October 20, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Matthew F Kennelly |
| Personal Injury: Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury Product Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 25, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand and Separate or Affirmative Defenses by Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc.,, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, U.S.A., Inc.(Glinka Przybysz, Andrea) |
| Filing 7 NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc.,, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, U.S.A., Inc. (Glinka Przybysz, Andrea) |
| Filing 6 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc.,, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, U.S.A., Inc. by Andrea Marie Glinka Przybysz (Glinka Przybysz, Andrea) |
| Filing 5 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc.,, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, U.S.A., Inc. by James R M Hemmings (Hemmings, James) |
| Filing 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc.,, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, U.S.A., Inc. by Sherry Ann Knutson (Knutson, Sherry) |
| Filing 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc.,, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, U.S.A., Inc. by Brittany Lynne Weiss (Weiss, Brittany) |
Filing 2
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ORDER: It appearing that, for reasons of judicial efficiency, coordinated pretrial proceedings in the cases listed below should be presided over by a single district judge as provided for by IOP13(e) and that a single magistrate judge should be designated for these cases; and It further appearing that the Hon. Matthew F. Kennelly, has agreed to preside over these proceedings; and It further appearing that Magistrate Judge Young B. Kim has agreed to be the designated magistrate judge in these proceedings; therefore It is hereby ordered that Judge Kennelly shall preside over pretrial proceedings, including case management and discovery supervision, in the cases listed below; and It is further ordered that Magistrate Judge Kim shall be the designated magistrate judge; and It is further ordered that these cases shall remain pending on the calendars of the judges to whom they are currently assigned, and that an order be entered in each case by Judge Kennelly at such time as coordinated pretrial proceedings have concluded; and It is further ordered that the Clerk of Court shall open a new civil case (20 CV 623, In Re: Uloric Products Liability Coordinated Pretrial Proceedings) under which all future filings related to these coordinated pretrial proceedings shall be filed; and It is further ordered that the Clerk of Court shall link the individual cases listed below to 20 CV 623, In Re: Uloric Products Liability Coordinated Pretrial Proceedings. Signed by Executive Committee on 10/28/2020. (lma, )
|
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT AND JURY TRIAL DEMANDED filed by David Kendrick; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-17561849. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Durant, Christine) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Heather K. McShain. Case assignment: Random assignment. (cm, ) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Northern 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.
