Cases

ARNOLD, Circuit Judge. Elaine Robinson is one of 64 women from 29 states who sued Pfizer in a Missouri state court, asserting state-law claims that arose from Pfizer’s manufacture and sale of the drug Lipitor, which they allege causes diabetes. Pfizer removed the ease to federal district court, 1 maintaining that the ca

ORDER In the multidistrict litigation docket that gave rise to this appeal (MDL No. 2545), the district court dismissed all cases with prejudice that involved the above-named defendants, Pfizer, Inc. and Pharmacia & Upjohn Company, LLC, the makers of the drug Depo-Testosterone.1 Some of the more than one thousand individual cases subject to this appeal were resolved by final jud

Joyner, District Judge Before the Court are Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 27) and Corrected Memorandum in Support thereof (Doc. No. 31), Plaintiff's Response in Opposition thereto (Doc. No. 42), Defendants' Reply in Support thereof (Doc. No. 48), and Plaintiff's Notice of Supplemental Authority (Doc. No. 54). We deny Defendants' Motion for the following reasons. I. BACKGROUND

NEWMAN, Circuit Judge, dissenting. I respectfully dissent. The panel majority’s ruling on patent term adjustment is in conflict with the Patent Act, for the PTO’s admittedly incomplete restriction requirement during patent examination contributed' to the delay in issuance of the patent. The panel majority reasons that Wyeth1 could have or should have filed a spec

DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs-Appellants Teachers’ Retirement System of Louisiana and Christine Fleckles, acting on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated investors (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), brought suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Pfizer, Inc. and several of its directors and officers,

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DAVID BRAMLETTE, District Judge. Plaintiff Annie Chatman brings suit in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 against Defendants Pfizer, Inc., Wyeth LLC, and Schwarz Pharma, Inc. N/K/A UCB, Inc., manufacturers of the brand-name drug Reglan (collectively, Brand Defendants), and Defendants Pliva, Inc., Barr Laboratories, Inc., and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., man

MEMORANDUM OPINION SHARION AYCOCK, District Judge. In this diversity action, Plaintiff Lirlene Gardley-Starks asserts numerous causes of action under Mississippi law, arguing that her ingestion of the prescription drug metoclopramide caused her to develop a neurological disorder known as tardive dyskinesia. Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment [81] filed by Defendant Schwarz Pharma

*468 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FILED BY PFIZER, INC., WYETH, LLC, AND SCHWARZ PHARMA, INC., AND GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS FILED BY WATSON PHARMA, INC., AND WATSON LABORATORIES HALIL SULEYMAN OZERDEN, District Judge. BEFORE THE COURT is a Motion for Summary Judgment [75] filed September 19, 2011, on b

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Sterling Johnson, Jr., Senior U.S.D.J. Plaintiffs Matthew Fermín, Lichun Huo, Josefina Valdez, and Adriana Sousa (“Plaintiffs”) bring this action against Defendant Pfizer Incorporated (“Pfizer” or “Defendant”) pursuant to the Federal Food Drug & Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), 21 U.S.C. § 352 et seq., and New York, Florida and California state consumer laws. In short, in this “slack-fill”

675 F.Supp.2d 1159 (2009) Yamile A. GOMEZ, and Manuel Jesus Gomez, Plaintiffs, v. PFIZER, INC., a Delaware corp. for profit, McNeil-PPC, Inc., a New Jersey corp. for profit, Johnson & Johnson Co., a New Jersey corp. for profit, and Publix Super Markets, Inc., a Florida corporation for profit, Defendants. Case No. 09-22700-CIV. United States District Court, S.D. Florida. Dec

49 Cal.4th 758 (2010) 111 Cal. Rptr. 3d 666 233 P.3d 1066 JAMES CLAYWORTH et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. PFIZER, INC., et al., Defendants and Respondents. No. S166435. Supreme Court of California. July 12, 2010. *761 Alioto Law Firm, Joseph M. Alioto, Joseph M. Alioto, Jr., T

HAMILTON, Circuit Judge. In Wyeth v. Levine, the Supreme Court held that claims against a manufacturer of a brand-namé prescription drug for failure to warn adequately of the drug’s dangers were not preempted by federal law. 555 U.S. 555

535 F.Supp.2d 1252 (2008) April WORLEY, Plaintiff, v. PFIZER, INC., et al., Defendants. No. 2:06-cv-916-MEF. United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Northern Division. March 3, 2008. *1253 Andy Dow Birchfield, Jr., W. Roger Smith, III, Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles, P.C., Matthew Edward Munson, Frank M. Wi

471 F.Supp.2d 1207 (2006) Jessica SOUTHERN, Plaintiff, v. PFIZER, INC., individually and as successor in interest to Parke-Davis and Warner Lambert Company, et al., Defendants. No. 2:06-CV-836-VEH. United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Southern Division. June 23, 2006. *1208 *1209

552 F.3d 659 (2009) ASHLEY COUNTY, ARKANSAS; Benton County, Arkansas; Cleburne County, Arkansas; Faulkner County, Arkansas, Plaintiffs, Independence County, Arkansas; Chicot County, Arkansas; Conway County, Arkansas; Cross County, Arkansas; Fulton County, Arkansas; Jackson County, Arkansas; Lawrence County, Arkansas; Izard County, Arkansas; Monroe County, Arkansas; Nevada County, Arkansas; Pulaski County, Arkansas; Sevier County, Arkansas; Sharp Coun

*373Opinion delivered by FERGUSON, Acting Chief Justice. This is a products liability case that was dismissed by the Window Rock District Court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. It concerns the prescription drug Rezulin, which had been used to treat diabetes, a disease prevalent among Native Americans. The question is whether the district court ha

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PATTI B. SARIS, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. and Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (“Kaiser”), Aetna, Inc. (“Aetna”), and Guardian Life Insurance Company (“Guardian”), collectively the Coordinated Plaintiffs, bring this case against Pfizer, Inc. and Warner-Lambert Company, alleging violations of the Racketeer Influ

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE May 4, 2005 Session PFIZER, INC. v. RUTH E. JOHNSON, COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE FOR THE STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Chancery Court for Davidson County No. 01-2385-II Carol L. McCoy, Chancellor No. M2004-00041-COA-R3-CV - Filed January 23, 2006 Pf

OPINION REGARDING MOTIONS TO DISMISS, TO STAY, FOR RELIEF FROM THE STAY AND OTHER RELIEF STUART M. BERNSTEIN, Chief Judge. Plaintiffs Continental Casualty Company (“CCC”) and Continental Insurance Company (“CIC,” and together with CCC, the “Plaintiffs”) commenced this adversary proceeding against Pfizer, Inc. (“Pfizer”), Quigley Company, Inc. (“Quigley”) — the debtor in possession and Pfizer’s wholly owned s

MEMORANDUM GREGORY M. SLEET, Chief Judge. I. INTRODUCTION In this consolidated patent infringement action, plaintiffs Pfizer Inc., Warner-Lambert Company, L.L.C., C.P. Pharmaceuticals International C.V., and Northwestern University (collectively, “the plaintiffs”) allege that pharmaceutical products proposed by defendants Actavis Elizabeth, L.L.C., Actavis, Inc., Alphapharm