Cases

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER JOHN F. KEENAN, District Judge: Plaintiffs are Virginia residents who brought suit against Defendant Merck Sharp & Dohme Corporation (“Merck”) for alleged jaw injuries caused by Merck’s prescription osteoporosis drug Fosamax. Merck moves for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure claiming that Plaintiffs’

MEMORANDUM ** Michelle Latiolais appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Merck & Co. (“Merck”) on her claim that Merck failed to adequately warn, as a result of inadequate testing, of claimed suicide risks associated with the cholesterol-lowering medication Zocor. She also appeals the district court’s denial of her motion to re-tax costs awarded to Merck. We affirm.1

961 F.Supp. 387 (1997) Judith SAARI, Plaintiff, v. MERCK & CO., INC., SmithKline Beecham Biologicals, and SmithKline Beecham Pharmaceuticals, Defendants. No. 95-CV-683 RWS. United States District Court, N.D. New York. March 11, 1997. *388 Judith Saari, Ballston Spa, NY, pro se. Venable, Baetjer and Howard, L.L.P., Balt

766 A.2d 442 (2000) SMITHKLINE BEECHAM PHARMACEUTICALS CO., Smithkline Beecham Holding Corporation, Smithkline Beecham Corporation and Smithkline Beecham Biologicals S.A., Defendants Below, Appellants, v. MERCK & CO., INC., Plaintiff Below, Appellee. No. 403, 1999. Supreme Court of Delaware. Submitted: June 20, 2000. Decided: December 1, 2000. R

MEMORANDUM DAVIS, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION As the gravamen of their principal claims in these cases, plaintiffs allege that their minor children suffered an increased risk of developmental harms and specifically, autism, which were proximately caused by the administration of various childhood vaccines containing the preservative thim-erosal, the composition of which contains mer

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 24a0187p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ THOMAS MERCK, individually and as a representative │ of the Class,

450 F.Supp.2d 582 (2006) Julius WEBB, et al. Plaintiffs, v. MERCK & CO., INC., Defendant. No. Civ.A. 99-413. United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania. September 8, 2006. *583 *584 *585 Adrian J. Moody, Joseph C. Kohn, Martin J. D'Urso, Law Office

PER CURIAM: * Elena Strujan, a nonprisoner, filed a civil complaint against Merck and Company, Incorporated (Merck), for damages based on her use of the drug Vioxx. Because she failed to disclose her potential claim against Merck in a prior bankruptcy petition, the district court found that the doctrine of judicial estoppel applied and granted Merck’s summary judgment motion. The district court a

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 05-4217 ___________ Mary Plubell, on behalf of herself * and all others similarly situated; * * Respondent, * Appeal from the United States *

PER CURIAM: * Gene Weeks settled his Vioxx-related claims against Merck & Company for *257$285,000. Appellant Ronald Benjamin and Appellee Maria Tejedor both claimed to represent Weeks in connection with his settlement. Each argued that he or she deserved the resulting $67,500 in attorney’s fees. The district court adopted a special ma

236 F.Supp.2d 517 (2002) Angela OXENDINE, Plaintiff v. MERCK AND COMPANY, INC., et al., Defendants Michael Renngli, Plaintiff v. Merck And Company, Inc., et al., Defendants David Hoggan, Plaintiff v. Merck And Company, Inc., Defendants James Whitfield, Plaintiff v. Merck And Company, Inc., Defendants Eduardo and Maria Camacho, Plaintiffs v. Sigma-Aldrich, Inc., et al., Defendants Angela Douglas,

Justice Scalia, with whom Justice Thomas joins, concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. Private suits under § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U. S. C. § 78j(b), must be brought within “(1) 2 years after the discovery of the facts constituting the violation” or “(2) 5 years after such violation,” whichever comes first. 28 U. S. C. § 1658(b)(1). I agree with the Court that scienter

OPINION THOMAS, Circuit Judge: Erin and Shawn Holmes appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Merck & Company in their diversity action alleging wrongful death. They contend that the district court erred in applying the standards of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (Vaccine Act or the Act), 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-22, to

PER CURIAM: * Lawrence W. Fitzgerald, Jr., Colorado prisoner # 66345, has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal following the district court’s denial of his IFP motion and certification that his appeal from the denial of reconsideration was not taken in good faith. A district court may deny a motion for leave to appeal IFP by certifying that the appeal is not taken

670 F.Supp.2d 201 (2009) MERCK EPROVA AG and Merck KGaA, Plaintiffs, v. PROTHERA, INC., Defendant. No. 08 Civ. 0035(RMB)(JCF). United States District Court, S.D. New York. September 17, 2009. *203 Robert Eliot Hanlon, Thomas Jude Parker, Natalie Christine Clayton, Rowan Elizabeth Morris, Victoria Elizabeth Spataro, Alston & B

PER CURIAM: * Lawrence W. Fitzgerald, Jr., Colorado prisoner # 66345, has filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal following the district court’s denial of his IFP motion and certification that his appeal from the denial of reconsideration was not taken in good faith. A district court may deny a motion for leave to appeal IFP by certifying that the appeal is not taken

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2009 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2009 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit

[Cite as Frost v. Evenflo Co., Inc., 2023-Ohio-4561.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT MIAMI COUNTY KRISTINA RENE FROST, AND GARY : ALLEN MAYS, : Individually and as Co-Personal : C.A. No. 2022-CA-29 Representatives of the : Estates

ORDER NORGLE, District Judge. Before the court is Magistrate Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer's 83-page Report and Recommendation (the “Report”), dated November 13, 1992, which recommends: (1) granting Merck’s motion for summary judgment asserting that all claims of Zumbro’s patent are invalid on account of the inventors’ failure to comply with the best mode requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112; (2) or alternative