Cases

ORDER ON SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFS JOHN A. HOUSTON, District Judge. INTRODUCTION Before the Court are the parties’ supplemental briefs on modification of the class definition. After a careful consideration of the briefs and relevant exhibits submitted by the parties, the Court sets forth its decision below. BACKGROUND 1. Factual Backgr

RULING ON SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT STEFAN R. UNDERHILL, District Judge. Before the court is Defendants’ Supplemental Motion for Summary Judgment Regarding Statute of Limitations And Commencement Date of Lawsuit (doc. # 326). Despite more than seven years of vigorous litigation, Defendants Wyeth, Inc. and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (collectively ‘Wyeth”) seek to end this case in th

RULING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT JANET BOND ARTERTON, District Judge. On August 18, 2004, Plaintiffs Margaret Fraser and Joseph Fraser filed a Complaint against Defendants Wyeth, Inc. and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (collectively “Wyeth” or “Defendants”), claiming failure to warn, strict products liability, negligence, misrepresentation, and punitive damages under the Connecticut Product Liability Ac

RULING ON POST-TRIAL MOTIONS JANET BOND ARTERTON, District Judge. Following a jury trial and a verdict in favor of Plaintiffs Margaret Fraser and Joseph Fraser, Defendants Wyeth, Inc. and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (collectively “Wyeth”) move [Doc. # 337] pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(b) for judgment as a matter of law on all of Plaintiffs’ claims and move [Doc. #339] pursuant to Federal

*1276 LUCERO, Circuit Judge. Susan and Steven Schroek filed suit against brand-name and generic manufacturers of the. drug metoclopramide, alleging that Susan Schrock’s use of generic metoclopramide caused her to develop tar-dive dyskinesia, a neurological disorder characterized by involuntary body mov

662 F.3d 1067 (2011) Jeanette RICK, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. WYETH, INC., et al., Defendants-Appellees. Nos. 10-3354, 10-3355, 10-3356, 10-3357, 10-3358, 10-3359, 10-3360, 10-3362, 10-3363. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. Submitted: June 15, 2011. Filed: October 25, 2011. *1068 Daniel E.

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION STEFAN R. UNDERHILL, District Judge. Defendants Wyeth, Inc. and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (collectively “Wyeth”) have argued that Connecticut “does not recognize strict liability claims for design defects in prescription drugs” under the Connecticut Product Liability Act (“CPLA”). See Wyeth’s Bench Br. Regarding Design Defect Claims Under Connecticut Law (doc.

344 F.Supp.2d 674 (2004) Deborah GREENE, Joyce Trombley, Stephanie Gardner, Deborah Wilson, and Karen Tatomer, Plaintiffs, v. WYETH, formerly known as American Home Products Corporation; Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories Division, a division of American Home Products Corp.; A.H. Robins Company, Incorporated; Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories Company; American Home Products Subsidiary Holding Corporation; Wyeth Laboratories, Inc. (formerly known as Wyeth-Ayerst P

591 F.3d 613 (2010) In re PREMPRO PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION, *614 Sandra Kirkland; Patricia Lawton-Wilson; Monica Lee; Katherine Maiello; Dorothy Mallette; Nola McAdoo; Lillian Meeks; Brenda Nicholson; Joanne Nickel; Barbara Norvell; Reva Orr; Regina Parker; April Patterson; Kathleen Perkinson; Donna Peters; Joanne Peterson; Mary Phillips; Viola Plieseis; Joyce Podhayski; Kathleen Preston; Lydia Ross; Diane S

278 F.Supp.2d 684 (2003) Rita Fayen SMITH, Plaintiff, v. WYETH-AYERST LABORATORIES COMPANY, Defendant. No. 3:01 CV 355-V. United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division. April 17, 2003. *685 *686 *687 *68

FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit PUBLISH August 28, 2013 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

616 F.3d 134 (2010) Howard HENRY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WYETH PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Walter Wardrop, Andrew Schaschl, and Michael McDermott, Defendant-Appellees. Docket No. 08-1477-cv. United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. Argued: May 29, 2009. Decided: August 4, 2010. *138 Steven Anthony Morelli, Law

ORDER THOMAS S. ZILLY, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendants Pharmacia Inc., Pharmacia and Upjohn Corporation (“Upjohn”), Wyeth LLC and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc.’s (together “Wyeth”) Motion for Summary Judgment, docket no. 89.1 Having reviewed the memoranda, declarations, and exhibits submitted by the parties, the Court enters the following order:<

522 F.Supp.2d 1257 (2007) William BARNICK, Plaintiff, v. WYETH, et al., Defendants. No. CV 07-3859 SVW (Ex). United States District Court, C.D. California. October 25, 2007. *1258 Darren M. Cohen, Elana R. Levine, Eric B. Kingsley, George R. Kingsley, Kingsley and Kingsley, Encino, CA, Gregory N. Karasik, Ira Spiro, Justian Jusuf

ORDER 1 WM. R. WILSON, JR., District Judge. Pending are Defendants’ Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, or for New Trial, or Remittitur of Punitive Damages Awards (Doc. Nos. 637, 642). Plaintiff has responded and Defendants have replied.2 The parties presented oral arguments on May 9, 2008. I. BACKGROUND

625 F.3d 22 (2010) Angel A. VEGA-COLÓN, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. WYETH PHARMACEUTICALS, Defendant, Appellee. No. 09-1861. United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. Submitted June 10, 2010. Decided October 28, 2010. *23 Anibal Escanellas-Rivera and Escanellas & Juan, P.S.C. on brief for appellant.

401 F.3d 1299 ISRAEL BIO-ENGINEERING PROJECT, Plaintiff,v.AMGEN INC., Immunex Corporation, Wyeth, and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Defendants, andYeda Research and Development Co., Ltd., Defendant, andInter-Lab Ltd. and Serono International S.A., Movants-Appellants.Israel Bio-Engineering Project, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.Amgen Inc., Immunex Corporation, Wyeth, and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Defendants-Appellees, andYe

611 F.Supp.2d 110 (2009) Angel A. VEGA COLÓN, Plaintiff, v. WYETH PHARMACEUTICAL, Defendants. Civil No. 07-2090 (FAB). United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. May 1, 2009. *112 Anibal Escanellas-Rivera, Escanellas & Juan, San Juan, PR, for Plaintiff. Juan F. Santos-Caraballo, Maria Antongiorgi, McConnell Valdes,

UNITED S'I`ATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DlSTRlCT OF COLUMBIA ) JOSHUA J. ANGEL, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 1:18-cv-01142 ) FEDERAL HOME LOAN ) MORTGAGE CORPORATION, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) MEMORANBUM OPINION losian .l. Angel_, a holder of preferred stock in both the Federal National l\/Iortgage Association (“P`annie l\»ilae") and the Federal Honte Loan i\/fortgage Coiporation (“Freddie Mac"` and together with Fannie Mae the "Companies")` brings the present action as a pro n

MOORE, Circuit Judge. The Plaintiffs/Counterclaim Defendants-Appellees (collectively, Amgen) sued the Defendants/Counterclaimants-Appellants (collectively, Ariad) in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware for a declaratory judgment of invalidity and noninfringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,410,516 (the '516 patent). Ariad counterclaimed for infringement of claims 6, 18, 70-72, 188, and 184 of the '516 pate