Gallagher v. Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Plaintiff: Linda Gallagher
Defendant: Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Case Number: 2:2011cv00177
Filed: August 26, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Office: Covington Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: Danny C. Reeves
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury- Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
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
October 10, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 101 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: (1) Dfts AAIPharma, LLC; AAIPharma, Inc.; AAIPharma Development Services, Inc.; and NeoSan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s (MDL Record 2211) MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings are GRANTED w/ respect to the cla ims asserted by the following plts: a. No. 2: 11-177-DCR; b. No. 2: 11-179-DCR; c. No. 2: 11-180-DCR; d. No. 2: 11-185-DCR; e. 2: 11-186-DCR; f. No. 2: 11-188-DCR; g. No. 2: 11-191-DCR; h. No. 2: 11-197-DCR; i. No. 2: 11-204-DCR; j. No. 2: 11-210-DC R; k. No. 2: 11-213-DCR; l. No. 2: 11-215-DCR; m. No. 2: 11-221-DCR; n. No. 2: 11-295-DCR; o. No. 2: 11-325-DCR; p. No. 2: 11-327-DCR; q. No. 2: 11-332-DCR; r. No. 2: 11-337-DCR; s. No. 2: 11-346-DCR; t. No. 2: 11-348-DCR; u. No. 2: 11-349-DCR; v. No . 2: 11-351-DCR; w. No. 2: 11-353-DCR; x. No. 2: 11-354-DCR; y. No. 2: 11-355-DCR; z. No. 2: 11-356-DCR; aa. No. 2: 11-363-DCR; bb. No. 2: 11-368-DCR; cc. No. 2: 11-369-DCR; dd. No. 2: 11-375-DCR; ee. No. 2: 11-376-DCR; ff. No. 2: 11-377-DCR; gg. No. 2: 11-381-DCR; hh. No. 2: 11-394-DCR; ii. No. 2: 11-396-DCR; jj. No. 2: 11-401-DCR; kk. No. 2: 12-032-DCR; ll. No. 2: 12-041-DCR; mm. No. 2: 12-042-DCR; nn. No. 2: 12-043-DCR; oo. No. 2: 12-047-DCR; pp. No. 2: 12-048-DCR; qq. No. 2: 12-049-DCR; rr. No. 2: 12-062-DCR; ss. No. 2: 12-064-DCR; tt. No. 2: 12-065-DCR; uu. No. 2: 12-066-DCR; vv. No. 2: 12-150-DCR. 2. Claims asserted by these plts against Dfts AAIPharma, LLC, AAIPharma, Inc.; AAIPharma Development Services, Inc.; and NeoSan Pharmaceuti cals, Inc. are DISMISSED, with prejudice. 3. With regard to Lopez v. Eli Lilly and Company, et al., No. 2: 12-046-DCR, Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (MDL Record No. 2211) is GRANTED, in part. Counts II, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, XIII, XIV, and XV of the Lopez Amended Complaint are DISMISSED, with prejudice. Counts I, III, IV, XII, and XVI remain pending. 4. Dfts AAIPharma, LLC; AAIPharma, Inc.; AAIPharma Development Services, Inc.; and NeoSan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings in the action: Lopez, et al., v. Eli Lilly and Company, et al., No. 2: 12-046-DCR (MDL Record No. 2227) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 10/10/2012.Associated Cases: 2:11-md-02226-DCR et al.(STB)cc: COR
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 Kentucky Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Gallagher v. Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Linda Gallagher
Represented By: Morris Bart, III
Represented By: Daniel E. Becnel, Jr.
Represented By: Matthew B. Moreland
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: Xanodyne 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 ]

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?