Hudson v. Pfizer Inc.

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California

Hudson v. Pfizer Inc.

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 JENNIFER HUDSON, Case No. 2:24-cv-03441-TLN-SCR 11 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY ACTION 12 v. Complaint Filed: December 11, 2024 13 PFIZER INC., VIATRIS INC., GREENSTONE Trial Date: None set LLC, PRASCOLABS, PHARMACIA & 14 UPJOHN; and DOES 1 through 50, Inclusive, 15 Defendants. 16 17

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

28 ] Before the Court is the stipulation of Jennifer Hudson (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants Pfizer 2 || Inc., Pharmacia & Upjohn Company LLC, Prasco, LLC d/b/a Prasco Laboratories, Viatris Inc., and 3 || Greenstone LLC (“Defendants”), to stay this action. 4 On November 26, 2024, certain plaintiffs filed a petition with the Judicial Panel on 5 || Multidistrict Litigation (““JPML”) to centralize this and other cases in which plaintiffs allege 6 || personal injuries relating to the use of Depo-Provera, into a Multidistrict Litigation (“MDL”) (the 7 || “Petition”). The JPML has set the Petition for a hearing on January 30, 2025, and is expected to 8 || decide the Petition in early February 2025. The parties seek a stay of this case through February 9 || 28, 2025, or until the Petition is decided, whichever is sooner. Courts routinely find good cause to 10 || stay a case during the pendency of a JPML petition. E.g., Romine v. Pfizer Inc., et al., No. 1:24- 11 || cv-01446, ECF No. 15 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2024); Silber v. Davol Inc., No. 1:18-cv-00479, 2018 12 || WL 10323817, at *1 (E.D. Cal. June 18, 2018) (“Cases such as this are frequently stayed pending 13 || the outcome of pending transfer petitions before the MDL panel.”); Stark v. McKesson Corp., No. 14 || 2:17-cv-00095,

2017 WL 1153135

, at *3 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 28, 2017); Sprint Commc'ns Co. L.P. v. 15 || Pac. Bell Tel. Co., No. 2:14-cv-01257,

2014 WL 7239474

, at *2 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16, 2014). 16 Accordingly, the Court finds good cause for the stipulation and hereby GRANTS the 17 || stipulation. This action shall be stayed through February 28, 2025 or until the JPML decides the 18 || Petition, whichever is sooner. On February 28, 2025, if this action is not transferred to an MDL 19 || proceeding, the parties shall file a joint status update. If the Petition is denied, Defendants shall 20 || have through and until 21 days after the JPML rules on the anticipated JPML petition to respond to 21 || the Complaint. 22 7, 23 || Dated: January 3, 2025 Troy L. Nunley Chief United States District Judge 25 26 27 28 -2- eae □□ □□ 03441

Reference

Status
Unknown