Bono v. C. R. Bard, Inc.

Bono v. C. R. Bard, Inc.

Plaintiff:	Patricia Bono
Defendant:	C. R. Bard, Inc.
Case Number:	2:2013cv18697
Filed:	July 10, 2013
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia
Office:	Charleston Office
County:	XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge:	Joseph R. Goodwin
Nature of Suit:	Personal Inj. Prod. Liability
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
January 28, 2015	Filing 102 ORDER Plaintiffs' 57 Omnibus Motion to Exclude Certain General Opinions and Testimony of C.R. Bard's Physician Experts is DENIED; Plaintiffs' 68 Motion to Exclude Certain Opinions and Testimony of C.R. Bard, Inc.'s Non-Retain ed Corporate Experts is DENIED; Bard's 82 Motion to Exclude or Limit Certain Opinions and Testimony By Plaintiffs' Treating Physicians is DENIED; Bard's 96 Omnibus Motion to Exclude Testimony and Evidence Pursuant to Daubert and th e Federal Rules of Evidence is DENIED; and Plaintiffs' 98 Motion to Strike or, in the Alternative, Response in Opposition to Bard's "Omnibus Motion to Exclude Testimony and Evidence Pursuant to Daubert and the Federal Rules of Eviden ce" is DENIED as moot. The parties have leave to file additional expert-specific Daubert motions and the court will modify an existing PTO to reflect these deadlines. Signed by Judge Joseph R. Goodwin on 1/28/2015. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (ts)

Date Filed

Document Text

January 28, 2015

Filing 102 ORDER Plaintiffs' 57 Omnibus Motion to Exclude Certain General Opinions and Testimony of C.R. Bard's Physician Experts is DENIED; Plaintiffs' 68 Motion to Exclude Certain Opinions and Testimony of C.R. Bard, Inc.'s Non-Retain ed Corporate Experts is DENIED; Bard's 82 Motion to Exclude or Limit Certain Opinions and Testimony By Plaintiffs' Treating Physicians is DENIED; Bard's 96 Omnibus Motion to Exclude Testimony and Evidence Pursuant to Daubert and th e Federal Rules of Evidence is DENIED; and Plaintiffs' 98 Motion to Strike or, in the Alternative, Response in Opposition to Bard's "Omnibus Motion to Exclude Testimony and Evidence Pursuant to Daubert and the Federal Rules of Eviden ce" is DENIED as moot. The parties have leave to file additional expert-specific Daubert motions and the court will modify an existing PTO to reflect these deadlines. Signed by Judge Joseph R. Goodwin on 1/28/2015. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (ts)

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 West Virginia Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Bono v. C. R. Bard, Inc.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Patricia Bono
Represented By:	John T. Boundas
Represented By:	Sejal K. Brahmbhatt
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: C. R. Bard, 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?