Becoat v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Inc. et al
| Lisa L. Becoat |
| McKesson Corporation, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP and Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Inc. |
| 5:2018cv00562 |
| October 5, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
| Karen K Caldwell |
| Personal Injury: Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury Product Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 28, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| ***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Caldwell for review: re MOTION for Entry of Case Management Order Establishing Standards & Procedures for Counsel Seeking Reimbursement for Common Benefit Fees & Costs (180 in 5:18-md-02809-KKC, et al) Associated Cases: 5:18-md-02809-KKC et al.(TDA) |
| Filing 11 MASTER COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND, filed by Plaintiffs David Taylor, et al against Defendants Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, LP, and McKesson Corporation. Filed per QC re 184 in 5:18-md-2809, et alAssociated Cases: 5:18-md-02809-KKC et al.(CBD) |
| Filing 10 AMENDED DOCUMENT by David Taylor, Leatha Taylor. Plaintiffs' Master Complaint and Jury Demand. Associated Cases: 5:18-md-02809-KKC et al.(Moore, Jennifer)See DE ( 185 in 5:18-md-2809) for CORRECTED entry of this pleading Modified on 11/21/2018 (CBD). |
| Filing 9 JOINT MOTION FOR ENTRY OF STIPULATED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER by Plaintiffs, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, and McKesson Corporation (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1-Proposed Stipulated CMO, #2 Exhibit 2- Plaintiff Profile Form and Authorization)Associated Cases: 5:18-md-02809-KKC et al.(Moore, Jennifer) Modified text on 11/20/2018 (CBD). |
| Filing 8 MOTION for Entry by David Taylor of Case Management Order Establishing Standards & Procedures for Counsel Seeking Reimbursement for Common Benefit Fees & Costs (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order, #2 PO Exhibit A, #3 PO Exhibit B, #4 PO Exhibit C) Associated Cases: 5:18-md-02809-KKC et al.(Moore, Jennifer) Modified text on 11/9/2018 (TDA). |
Filing 7
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER NO. 1 REGARDING MASTER PLEADINGS AND PROPOSED DISCOVERY PLAN FOR PHASE ONE: GENERAL CAUSATION: plaintiffs' proposal (DE 168 in 5:18-md-2809, et al) to conduct concurrent discovery on all issues is DENIED. The Court further ORDERS as follows: 1. Both parties having proposed the filing of a Master Complaint, the Court hereby ORDERS that, on or before November 19, 2018, Plaintiffs must file a Master Complaint. 2. The Master Complaint may not be amended absent leave of the Court. 3. The Master Complaint will be the operative complaint in every individual action for the duration of these pretrial proceedings except that Defendants may respond to any individual complaint by way of motions permissible under Rule 12 of the FRCP. 4. If the parties wish to utilize Plaintiff Fact Sheets, authorization forms, and/or Defendant Fact Sheets, they must file proposed facts sheets and authorization forms and an accompanying motion for approval on or before November 19, 2018. If the parties are unable to agree on such fact sheets and forms, they may file separate proposals. Any objections to the motion for approval must be filed within 14 days of the date the motion for approval is filed. 5. On or before December 19, 2018, Defendants must file a Master Answer ("Master Answer") responding to the allegations of the Master Complaint. 6. Defendants will be deemed to have answered all cases pending in, filed in, or subsequently transferred to the MDL proceedings upon the filing of the Master Answer. The Master Answer will be deemed to deny any allegations contained in individual complaints that are not contained in the Master Complaint. 7. After the filing of the Master Answer, cases may only be voluntarily dismissed by order of the Court pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) or a stipulation pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(ii), except that a Complaint filed directly in the MDL may be voluntarily dismissed upon notice by Plaintiff within ten (10) days of the filing of the Complaint. 8. Neither the filing of the Master Answer, nor the filing of a Notice of Appearance, nor CM/ECF registration, nor the appearance of any party or counsel at a status conference constitutes a waiver of any defense including lack of personal jurisdiction, objections to service, jurisdiction or venue, and any defenses to any state law claims. 9. The plaintiffs may not file a reply to the Master Answer. 10. Both parties having proposed the use of a Short Form Complaint, no later than December 19, 2018, Plaintiffs counsel must file a proposed Short Form Complaint and accompanying motion for approval stating the Short Form Complaint's proposed purpose and effect. Any objections to the motion for approval must be filed within 14 days of the date the motion for approval is filed. 11. On or before January 15, 2019, the parties must file a proposed plan. 12. In any action that is (a) filed in or transferred to this Court after this Order is entered and (b) consolidated with this action for pretrial purposes, the Clerk need not separately file the Case Management Orders already entered in these MDL proceedings. However, the Clerk must include a statement in the initial notice to counsel that the Order Regarding Practice and Procedure Upon Transfer, this Case Management Order, and all subsequent Case Management Orders govern all cases in the MDL proceedings. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 10/24/2018. Associated Cases: 5:18-md-02809-KKC et al.(CBD)cc: COR Modified text on 10/24/2018 (CBD).
|
| ***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Caldwell for review: re MOTION Adopt Plaintiffs' Proposed Scheduling Order ( 168 in 5:18-md-02809-KKC, et al) ; RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION ( 175 in 5:18-md-02809-KKC, et al); REPLY ( 178 in 5:18-md-02809-KKC, et al) Associated Cases: 5:18-md-02809-KKC - ALL CASES.(CBD) |
| NOTICE OF DOCKET MODIFICATION TO Jennifer Moore re (178 in 5:18-md-02809, et al) REPLY BRIEF. Error: a link was created to the Motion in one member case only. Entry by attorney; Clerk modified the entry to create a link to the Motion (R. 168 in 5:18-md-2809, et al), thereby placing the reply on the Judge's motion report. In the future, create a link to the subject motion in the Master Case. No further action required by counsel. cc: COR Associated Cases: 5:18-md-02809-KKC et al.(CBD) |
| NOTICE OF DOCKET MODIFICATION TO Emily Ullman re (175 in 5:18-md-02809, et al) Response in Opposition to Motion. Error: a link was not created to the Motion (R. 168 in 5:18-md-2809, et al). Entry by attorney; Clerk modified the entry to create a link to the Motion, thereby placing the response on the Judge's motion report. In the future, create a link to the subject motion in the Master Case. No further action required by counsel. cc: COR Associated Cases: 5:18-md-02809-KKC et al.(CBD) |
| Filing 6 REPLY BRIEF to (4 in 5:18-cv-00562-KKC) filed by David Taylor. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A- Xarelto PTO 27)Associated Cases: 5:18-md-02809-KKC et al.(Moore, Jennifer) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER: Motion (DE 165 in 5:18-md-2809, et al) is GRANTED and Rebecca L. Phillips of The Lanier Law Firm is substituted in place of Jerome Prather as a member of the Plaintiffs' Steering Committee. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 10/9/2018. Associated Cases: 5:18-md-02809-KKC et al.(CBD)cc: COR
|
| Filing 4 RESPONSE in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Proposed Schedule (DE 168 in 5:18-md-2809, et al) filed by AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Inc., McKesson Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit of Emily S. Ullman, #2 Exhibit A - Pls' JPML Motion, #3 Exhibit B - Pls' JPML Memorandum, #4 Exhibit C - Sept 7 CMC Transcript, #5 Exhibit D - Interested Parties' JPML Response, #6 Exhibit E - Zofran Scheduling Order, #7 Exhibit F - Vallejo v. Amgen Scheduling Order, #8 Exhibit G - Incretin Discovery Order, #9 Exhibit H - Filion (2016), #10 Exhibit I - Scirica (2014), #11 Exhibit J - Onglyza Prescribing information, #12 Exhibit K - Roundup Daubert Order, #13 Exhibit L - Roundup Scheduling Letter, #14 Exhibit M - JCCP CMO 3, #15 Exhibit N - JCCP CMO 4, #16 Exhibit O - JCCP CMC Transcript, #17 Exhibit P - Ethicon Plaintiff Form)Associated Cases: 5:18-md-02809-KKC et al.(Ullman, Emily) Modified link on 10/11/2018 (CBD). |
|
Filing 3
STANDING ORDER: 1. The Clerk is DIRECTED to ASSIGN all related matters to the Honorable Karen K. Caldwell on the Lexington docket. 2. All individual actions shall be consolidated with the MDL Master File No. 5:18-md-2809. 3. Actions shall be consolidated for purposes of discovery and other pre-trial matters. 4. A copy of this Order shall be filed in each appropriate case with a copy to all counsel. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on October 3, 2018.(SKV) cc: COR
|
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT (NO PROCESS REQUESTED). ( Filing fee $400; receipt number 0643-4185426), filed by Lisa L. Becoat. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(SKV) |
| Conflict Check run. (SKV) |
| REMARK: Counsel shall refer to #www.kyed.uscourts.gov/518-md-02809-kkc for review of Orders relative to filing procedures in MDL 2809. If you are not registered as an ECF Filing User, please complete the ECF Registration Form and return it to the Clerk within twenty-one (21) days. cc: Order Regarding Practice & Procedure upon Transfer filed February 9, 2018 served via U.S. Mail to counsel not registered as ECF Filing Users. (CBD) |
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 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.
