Gloucester, City of v. Purdue Pharma L.P. et al
Gloucester, City of |
McKesson Corporation, Richard Sackler, Purdue Pharma L.P., Mallinckrodt LLC, Beverly Sackler, Mallinckrodt plc, Actavis, Inc., Insys Therapeutics, Inc., Allergan PLC, CARDINAL HEALTH INC., TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC., Theresa Sackler, Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Actavis LLC, Actavis Pharma, Inc., Cephalon, Inc., Jonathan Sackler, Watson Laboratories, Inc, Collegium Pharmaceutical, Inc., The Purdue Frederick Company, Inc., Endo Health Solutions Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Ilene Sackler Lefcourt, Amerisourcebergen Drug Corporation, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., John Kapoor, David Sackler, Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Purdue Pharma Inc., Mortimer Da. Sackler and Kathe Sackler |
1:2019cv10168 |
January 25, 2019 |
US District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
Judith G Dein |
Personal Injury: Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury Product Liability |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on February 4, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 9 Copy of case file and certified copy of Order of Remand, Order of Dismissal and Docket Sheet mailed to Essex Superior Court on 2/4/2019. (Caruso, Stephanie) |
Filing 8 Magistrate Judge Judith G. Dein: ORDER entered. ORDER DISMISSING CASE(Caruso, Stephanie) |
Filing 7 Magistrate Judge Judith G. Dein: ENDORSED ORDER entered granting #6 Assented to MOTION to Remand to State Court and to Extend Defendants' Time to Respond to the Complaint Pending an Order of Remand. ORDER OF REMAND to the State Court (Caruso, Stephanie) |
Filing 6 Assented to MOTION to Remand to State Court and to Extend Defendants' Time to Respond to the Complaint Pending an Order of Remand by Amerisourcebergen Drug Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Rosen, Mark) |
Filing 5 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Amerisourcebergen Drug Corporation identifying Corporate Parent AmerisourceBergen Services Corporation, Corporate Parent AmerisourceBergen Corporation for Amerisourcebergen Drug Corporation.. (Rosen, Mark) |
Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Mark B. Rosen on behalf of Amerisourcebergen Drug Corporation (Rosen, Mark) |
Filing 3 Certified Copy of Notice of Removal Provided to Defense Counsel by e-mail (McKillop, Matthew) |
Filing 2 NOTICE of Case Assignment. Magistrate Judge Judith G. Dein assigned to case. Plaintiff's counsel, or defendant's counsel if this case was initiated by the filing of a Notice of Removal, are directed to the Notice and Procedures regarding Consent to Proceed before the Magistrate Judge which can be downloaded #here. These documents will be mailed to counsel not receiving notice electronically. Pursuant to General Order 09-3, until the Court receives for filing either a consent to the Magistrate Judge's jurisdiction or the reassignment of the case to a District Judge, the initial assignment of a civil case to the Magistrate Judge is a referral to the Magistrate Judge under 28 USC 636(b) for all pretrial non-dispositive matters and Report and Recommendations, but not for the Rule 16(b) scheduling conference. (Finn, Mary) |
Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Amerisourcebergen Drug Corporation ( Filing fee: $ 400, receipt number 0101-7509658 Fee Status: Filing Fee paid) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Service of Complaint, #2 Exhibit B - Kapoor Consent, #3 Civil Cover Sheet, #4 Category Sheet)(Dunlap, Joshua) |
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 Massachusetts 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.