throbber
Case 3:19-md-02913-WHO Document 1167 Filed 11/25/20 Page 1 of 7
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`IN RE: JUUL LABS, INC., MARKETING SALES
`PRACTICE AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY
`LITIGATION
`This Document Relates to All Plaintiffs Identified in
`Exhibit A
`
`3:19-md-02913 (WHO)
`
`Hon. William H. Orrick
`
`JUUL LABS, INC.’S NOTICE OF MOTION TO CONVERT ORDER OF DISMISSAL
`WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
`
`PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on January 15, 2021, or as soon thereafter as this matter may be
`heard, in Courtroom 2 of this Court, located at 450 Golden Gate Avenue, 17th Floor, San Francisco,
`California, Defendant Juul Labs, Inc. (“JLI”) will and hereby does move for the Court to convert its Order
`of Dismissal Without Prejudice (ECF No. 1073) to an order of dismissal with prejudice for plaintiffs
`identified in Exhibit A to JLI’s Motion for failure to submit discovery required by Case Management
`Order No. 8. The Motion is based on this Notice of Motion and the following Motion to Convert.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`JLI’s Notice of Motion to Convert
`Order Of Dismissal Without Prejudice To
`Order Of Dismissal With Prejudice
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-md-02913-WHO Document 1167 Filed 11/25/20 Page 2 of 7
`
`/s/ Renee D. Smith/
`Renee D. Smith
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`300 North LaSalle
`Chicago, IL 60654-3406
`Telephone: (312) 862-2000
`Facsimile: (312) 862-2200
`Renee.Smith@kirkland.com
`
`Peter A. Farrell, P.C.
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`1301 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
`Washington, DC 20004
`Telephone: (202) 389-5000
`Facsimile: (202) 389-5200
`Peter.farrell@kirkland.com
`Gregory P. Stone (SBN 78329)
`gregory.stone@mto.com
`Bethany W. Kristovich (SBN 241891)
`bethany.kristovich@mto.com
`John M. Gildersleeve (SBN 284618)
`john.gildersleeve@mto.com
`MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
`350 South Grand Avenue, 50th Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90071-3426
`Telephone: (213) 683-9100
`Facsimile: (213) 687-3702
`Attorneys for Defendant Juul Labs, Inc.
`
`2
`
`JLI’s Notice of Motion to Convert
`Order Of Dismissal Without Prejudice To
`Order Of Dismissal With Prejudice
`
`Dated: November 25, 2020
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-md-02913-WHO Document 1167 Filed 11/25/20 Page 3 of 7
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on November 25, 2020, I electronically served the foregoing Motion on all
`counsel of record in this action using the CM/ECF system.
`
`/s/ Renee D. Smith
`Renee D. Smith
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`JLI’s Notice of Motion to Convert
`Order Of Dismissal Without Prejudice To
`Order Of Dismissal With Prejudice
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-md-02913-WHO Document 1167 Filed 11/25/20 Page 4 of 7
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`IN RE: JUUL LABS, INC., MARKETING SALES
`PRACTICE AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY
`LITIGATION
`This Document Relates to All Plaintiffs Identified in
`Exhibit A
`
`3:19-md-02913 (WHO)
`
`Hon. William H. Orrick
`
`JUUL LABS, INC.’S MOTION TO CONVERT ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT
`PREJUDICE TO ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
`
`On October 21, 2020 this Court entered an Order (ECF No. 1073), dismissing without prejudice
`the claims of certain plaintiffs who had failed to submit a substantially complete Plaintiff Fact Sheet
`(“PFS”) in compliance with Case Management Order (“CMO”) No. 8 (ECF No. 406). Upon entry of the
`Court’s Order, those plaintiffs had 30 days to submit a substantially complete PFS, in which case, the
`parties would submit a stipulated motion to vacate the dismissal without prejudice Order. (See CMO No.
`8 § 13.) Otherwise, plaintiffs’ claims would be subject to dismissal with prejudice upon a motion to
`convert the order of dismissal without prejudice to an order of dismissal with prejudice by Juul Labs, Inc.
`(“JLI”). (Id.) The 42 plaintiffs identified in the attached Exhibit A each failed to submit a complete PFS
`since this Court entered the Order dismissing their claims without prejudice. (Affidavit of Christina
`Sharkey (“Aff.”) ¶¶ 3–4.)
`The Court should dismiss these plaintiffs with prejudice pursuant to its power to manage its
`dockets “without being subject to endless non-compliance with case management orders,” which is
`amplified in the MDL context. See In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Prods. Liab. Litig., 460 F.3d 1217,
`1227 (9th Cir. 2006). As the Ninth Circuit observed, “an MDL court’s decision to invoke dismissal as a
`sanction for failure to comply with its orders” “is necessarily informed, and broadened, by the number of
`actions, their complexity, and its charge in the multidistrict context to promote the just and efficient
`conduct of actions that are coordinated or consolidated for pretrial purposes.” Id. at 1252. Thus, dismissal
`with prejudice for failure to submit a PFS as required by an MDL Court Order is common MDL practice.
`
`4
`
`JLI’s Motion to Convert
`Order Of Dismissal Without Prejudice To
`Order Of Dismissal With Prejudice
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-md-02913-WHO Document 1167 Filed 11/25/20 Page 5 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`See, e.g., Ex. B, In re: Testosterone Replacement Therapy Products Liability Litigation, MDL 2545, CMO
`No. 118, ECF No. 2612 (N.D. Ill. May 11, 2018) (“The failure of these plaintiffs to comply with the PPF
`[Plaintiff Profile Form] requirements of CMO 85 amounts to an unjustified failure to produce discovery
`following entry of a court order. The failure to produce discovery is prejudicial to the defendants in these
`cases because it hinders the investigation and preparation of a defense in these cases. For those reasons,
`the Court finds it appropriate to dismiss with prejudice all such cases.”); Ex. C, In re: General Motors
`LLC Ignition Switch Litig. 14-MD-2543, Order No. 56, ECF No. 985 (S.D.N.Y. May 27, 2015) (“[T]he
`Court finds that dismissal with prejudice is the appropriate sanction for the individual Plaintiffs’ continued
`failure to submit PFSs as required by Order No. 25. . . . [T]imely submission of PFSs is essential to the
`orderly and expeditious management of this MDL, and crucial in ensuring that [Defendant] has adequate
`notice of the claims against it.”); Ex. D, In re PPA Prods. Liab. Litig., 01-MD-1407, Order Granting
`Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice, ECF No. 1935 (W.D. Wa. Aug. 15, 2003) (“[T]he unreasonabl[e] delay
`in completing the fact sheets and affirmations prejudices the Defendants’ ability to proceed with the cases
`effectively. The PFS and affirmations are designed to give each defendant the specific information
`necessary to defend the case against it. . . . The unreasonable delay in producing this information,
`therefore, severely prejudices the Defendants, warranting dismissal.”).
`Accordingly, pursuant to CMO No. 8 and the Court’s October 21, 2020 Order (ECF No. 1073),
`JLI respectfully requests the Court enter an order dismissing the claims of the 42 plaintiffs identified on
`Exhibit A with prejudice.
`
`
`Dated: November 25, 2020
`
`/s/ Renee D. Smith
`Renee D. Smith
`KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
`300 North LaSalle
`Chicago, IL 60654-3406
`Telephone: (312) 862-2000
`Facsimile: (312) 862-2200
`Renee.Smith@kirkland.com
`
`Peter A. Farrell, P.C.
`KIRKLAND & ELLI LLP
`1301 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
`5
`
`JLI’s Motion to Convert
`Order Of Dismissal Without Prejudice To
`Order Of Dismissal With Prejudice
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-md-02913-WHO Document 1167 Filed 11/25/20 Page 6 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`Washington, DC 20004
`Telephone: (202) 389-5000
`Facsimile: (202) 389-5200
`Peter.farrell@kirkland.com
`Gregory P. Stone (SBN 78329)
`gregory.stone@mto.com
`Bethany W. Kristovich (SBN 241891)
`bethany.kristovich@mto.com
`John M. Gildersleeve (SBN 284618)
`john.gildersleeve@mto.com
`MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP
`350 South Grand Avenue, 50th Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90071-3426
`Telephone: (213) 683-9100
`Facsimile: (213) 687-3702
`Attorneys for Defendant Juul Labs, Inc.
`
`6
`
`JLI’s Motion to Convert
`Order Of Dismissal Without Prejudice To
`Order Of Dismissal With Prejudice
`
`
`
`
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-md-02913-WHO Document 1167 Filed 11/25/20 Page 7 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`
`
`I hereby certify that on November 25, 2020, I electronically served the foregoing Motion on all
`counsel of record in this action using the CM/ECF system.
`
`
`/s/ Renee D. Smith
`Renee D. Smith
`
`
`JLI’s Motion to Convert
`Order Of Dismissal Without Prejudice To
`Order Of Dismissal With Prejudice
`
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket