MEHARG et al v. I-FLOW CORPORATION et al
Plaintiff: JENSEN MEHARG, ROBIN MEYER and MICHAEL MEHARG
Defendant: I-FLOW CORPORATION, ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP, ASTRAZENECA LP, ZENECA HOLDINGS, INC., HOSPIRA, INC., WATSON PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. and ABRAXIS BIOSCIENCE, INC.
Case Number: 1:2008cv00184
Filed: February 14, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office: Indianapolis Office
County: Hancock
Presiding Judge: Tim A. Baker
Presiding Judge: David Frank Hamilton
Nature of Suit: Personal Inj. Prod. Liability
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
March 1, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 304 ENTRY ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT: GRANTED 219 Motion for Summary Judgment **SEE ENTRY**. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 3/1/2010. (DWH)
September 18, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 279 ENTRY ON MOTION TO RECONSIDER ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. For the reasons discussed herein, plaintiffs' motion (dkt. 236) to join in I-Flow's motion for reconsideration is granted. I-Flow's motion for reconsideratio n (dkt. 234) is denied. Plaintiffs shall comply with the court's order for disclosure no later than 9/29/09, and the Astrazeneca defendants shall keep the document and its contents confidential as set forth herein. Signed by Judge David Frank Hamilton on 9/18/2009. (LBK)
September 14, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 277 ORDER denying AZ Defts' 213 Motion to Reconsider Denial of Protective Order (see Order for details). Signed by Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker on 9/14/09. (SWM)
May 15, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 170 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 117 Motion to Quash. The deposition of Earhart shall be conducted within 30 days of the date of this order, and the parties may coordinate with the Court a date on which the Magistrate Judge is available to resolve any disputes regarding the scope of questioning allowed. The Court denies as moot 118 I-Flow's motion to refile the proposed order it submitted with its motion to quash and for protective order. The Court orders the parties to sho w cause and file proposed redacted versions of their response and reply briefs (dkts. 123, 125), including all attachments, within 20 days of the date of this Order. See Order for further information. Signed by Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker on 5/15/2009. (LBK)
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 Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: MEHARG et al v. I-FLOW CORPORATION et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: JENSEN MEHARG
Represented By: Jeff S. Gibson
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: ROBIN MEYER
Represented By: Jeff S. Gibson
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: MICHAEL MEHARG
Represented By: Jeff S. Gibson
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: I-FLOW CORPORATION
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: ASTRAZENECA LP
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: ZENECA HOLDINGS, INC.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: HOSPIRA, INC.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: WATSON PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: ABRAXIS BIOSCIENCE, INC.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?