Whitener et al v. PLIVA, Inc. et al
| Joshua A Whitener, Sr. and Lindsey C Whitener |
| PLIVA, Inc., PLIVA USA Inc., PLIVA Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Barr Laboratories, Inc., Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., TEVA Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd., Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Rue de Sante Women's Center, Ltd. and John P McCrossen |
| 2:2010cv01552 |
| May 24, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana |
| New Orleans Office |
| Orleans |
| Personal Injury- Product Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1446 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
325
IT IS ORDERED that this matter is ADMINISTRATIVELY STAYED pending the outcome of the Whiteners' pending appeal. Signed by Judge Eldon E. Fallon on 5/20/14.(dno)
|
|
Filing
290
ORDER & REASONS that Defendant Meda Pharmaceuticals' 273 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED and that the claims against it are DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, having expressly determined that there is no just reason for delay, an entry of judgment pursuant to Rule 54(b) shall be issued with regard to this order. Signed by Judge Eldon E. Fallon on 4/22/14. (dno)
|
|
Filing
266
ORDER & REASONS that Defendants Barr Laboratories, Inc., PLIVA, Inc. and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.'s 175 Motion for Summary Judgment, Defendant Alaven Pharmaceutical LLC's 233 Motion for Summary Judgment and Defendant Schwarz P harma, Inc.'s 258 Motion for Summary Judgment are GRANTED and that the claims against PLIVA, Inc., Barr Laboratories, Inc., Teva Pharmaceuticals, Alaven Pharmaceutical, and Schwarz Pharma, Inc., now known as UCB, Inc., Barr Pharmaceuticals , erroneously named Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and PLIVA Hrvatska are DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that PLIVA, Inc., Barr Laboratories, Inc., Teva Pharmaceuticals' objections 249 to Magistrate Judge Roby's order are DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Judge Eldon E. Fallon on 3/27/14. (dno)
|
|
Filing
250
ORDER granting 228 Motion for Protective Order. Discovery is suspended pending the resolution of Teva's dispositive motion, or until the presiding District Judge orders otherwise. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen Wells Roby. (clm, )
|
|
Filing
160
ORDER & REASONS that the Defendants' 151 Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED. FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiffs' 155 Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED. Signed by Judge Eldon E. Fallon on 9/10/12. (dno, )
|
|
Filing
147
ORDER & REASONS denying 135 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Eldon E. Fallon on 6/4/12. (ala, )
|
|
Filing
146
ORDER & REASONS granting 60 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. Party Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. dismissed; granting 136 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Eldon E. Fallon on 4/18/12. (ala, ) .
|
|
Filing
130
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 112 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. Signed by Judge Eldon E. Fallon on 12/6/11. (ala, )
|
|
Filing
96
ORDER & REASONS re 12 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. IT IS ORDERED that Teva Limited shall promptly provide to Plaintiffs a copy of transcripts of the jurisdictional discovery in which Teva Limited invited Plaintiffs to participate, as well as exhibits to those depositions, costs to be borne by the Plaintiffs. Signed by Judge Eldon E. Fallon on 6/17/11.(ala, )
|
|
Filing
36
ORDER & REASONS denying 12 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Eldon E. Fallon on 7/27/10. (ala, )
|
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 Louisiana 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.
