Cases

JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge: *763 These appeals and cross-appeal are from the second in a series of bellwether trials from the Pinnacle Hip multidistrict litigation ("MDL"), in which several thousand plaintiffs claim injuries from Pinnacle hips manufactured and sold by DePuy Orthopaedics

JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge: This petition for writ of mandamus arises from a multidistrict litigation (“MDL”) proceeding involving more than 9,300 plaintiffs.1 Those plaintiffs have brought product-liability claims against petitioners for designing, manufacturing, and distributing an allegedly defective hip-implant device, the Pinnacle Acetabular Cup System (the “Pinnacle Device”).

787 F.Supp.2d 1358 (2011) IN RE: DePUY ORTHOPAEDICS, INC., PINNACLE HIP IMPLANT PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. MDL No. 2244. United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. May 23, 2011. *1359 Before JOHN G. HEYBURN II, Chairman, KATHRYN H. VRATIL, W. ROYAL FURGESON, JR., FRANK C. DAMRELL, JR., and PAUL J. BARBADORO, Judges of

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS F. Dennis Saylor IV, United States District Judge This is a qui tarn action alleging the submission of false claims to government health-care programs for a defective hip-replacement device. Relators Dr. Antoni Nargol and Dr. David Langton, who are expert witnesses in a related products-liability case involving the same device, have brought suit against d

753 F.Supp.2d 1378 (2010) In re: DePUY ORTHOPAEDICS, INC., ASR HIP IMPLANT PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. MDL No. 2197. United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. December 3, 2010. Before DAVID R. HANSEN, Acting Chairman, W. ROYAL FURGESON, JR., FRANK C. DAMRELL, JR., BARBARA S. JONES and PAUL J. BARBADORO, Judges of the Panel. TRANSFER ORDER<

638 F.Supp.2d 1226 (2009) Roger MILLER, an individual, Plaintiff, v. DePUY SPINE, INC., a Massachusetts corporation; Johnson & Johnson, Inc., a New Jersey corporation; JDA Surgical Associates, Inc., a California Corporation; Does I-X; and Roe Corporations I-X, inclusive, Defendants. Case No. 2:07-cv-01639-RJC-PAL. United States District Court, D. Nevada. May 1, 2009.

MEMORANDUM OPINION RICHARD L. WILLIAMS, Senior District Judge. This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motions for summary judgment and dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction. This case is one of more than two thousand separate products liability actions filed by more than five thousand plaintiffs claiming that defective “pedicle screw fixation devices” which have been surgically attac

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed September 1, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D21-619 Lower Tribunal No. 20-11245 ________________ GFA International, Inc., Appellan

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 08-0961 (PLF) ) HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL IN

ORDER MARCIA MORALES HOWARD, United States District Judge THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Insys Therapeutics, Inc.’s (In-sys) Amended Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 15; Motion), filed on September 2,2016. In the Motion, Insys requests that this Court dismiss plaintiff Robert N. Markland’s complaint for Damages and Demand for a Jury Trial (Doc. 2; Complaint),

Proceedings: Order: (1) GRANTING Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Venue (Doc. No. 46); (2) TRANSFERRING the Case to United States District Court, District of Arizona (Phoenix); and (3) VACATING the July 1, 2015 Hearing (IN CHAMBERS) JESUS G. BERNAL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Before the Court is a Motion to Transfer Venue Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) filed by Defendants. (Doc. No. 46.) The Court finds thi

ORDER MARCIA MORALES HOWARD, District Judge. THIS CAUSE comes before the Court as a products liability action pertaining to *1313an inferior vena cava filter, known as the G2®, designed and manufactured by Defendants C.R. Bard, Inc., and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.1 On February 19, 2008, a physician im

(2008) Lola B. THORPE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. ZIMMER, INC., Zimmer Holdings, Inc., and Zimmer US, Inc., Defendants. No. 08 Civ. 3888(CM)(FM). United States District Court, S.D. New York. December 2, 2008. DECISION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION McMAHON, District Judge:

Patti B. Saris, Chief United States District Judge *352INTRODUCTION This False Claims Act ("FCA") case pertains to Medicare reimbursements for at-home blood-testing kits. The kits allow patients on blood-thinning medication to monitor their blood's clotting time at home rather than traveling to a hospital or clinic. Th

OPINION WOLFSON, District Judge: This case involves complex retrocessional agreements between Plaintiff Munich Reinsurance America Inc. (“Munich”) and Defendant American National Insurance Company (“ANICO”). Munich filed a Complaint alleging breach of contract for ANICO’s refusal to pay certain claims submitted for payment by Munich under the parties’ agreements, and in response, ANI-CO filed a countercla

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION JANET BOND ARTERTON, District Judge. Table of Contents I. Summary of Findings and Conclusions.......................................35 II. Background..............................................................36 A. Overview of Patented Technology..........................:.......36 B. Accused Instruments........

28 F.Supp.2d 401 (1998) Jason LEIGH, Plaintiff, v. DANEK MEDICAL, INC., et al., Defendants. No. 4:95-CV-797-A. United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Fort Worth Division. June 25, 1998. *402 Michael Ray McGown, Weller Wheelus & Green, Beaumont, TX, John J. Cummings, III, Donna S. Cummings, Frank C. Dudenhefer, Jr., Cumming

5 F.Supp.2d 379 (1998) Jeanette WADE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. DANEK MEDICAL INC., et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 3:95CV876. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division. May 13, 1998. *380 Arthur Vincent Shaheen, Shaheen & Shaheen, Richmond, VA, John J. Cummings, III, New Orleans, LA, Easter Peter Moses

MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), FILED this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any Aug 26 2019, 5:34 am court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK Indiana Supreme Court the defense of res judicata, collateral

891 F.Supp. 751 (1995) STRYKER CORPORATION and Osteonics Corporation, Plaintiffs, v. INTERMEDICS ORTHOPEDICS, INC. and Marli Medical Supplies, Inc., Defendants. No. CV 90-3006 (ADS). United States District Court, E.D. New York. July 11, 1995. *752 *753 *754