Keitz v. Unnamed Sponsors of Cocaine Research Study et al, No. 3:2011cv00054 - Document 89 (W.D. Va. 2013)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Glen E. Conrad on 10/31/2013. (ssm)

Download PDF
r m a ni def nda , r A i- ud, notye as e t a vi bl s ve e gn i m uniy de e et e i ng e nt D . t Dao had t s red a e o r i m t f ns o t m edi m al actce cl m s,and i or he cal pr i ai t dered t U nied St esM ar t serve pr he t at shal o ocesson Dr. Ai- oud a t addr s pr vi d byt pl i if Thec t e nde t pl i ift ti m a ng tDa t he e s o de he antf. our r mi d he antf ha n ki amedialmal a tcecai , r i al r uie hi t ha obt ne awrte o ni sgne by c pr c i l m Vigni aw eq r s m o ve ai d itn pi on i d a e r wines sa i t tt d e nttde a e fom t applc bl sa r ofca ea t n xpe t t s t tng ha he ef nda s vit d r he i a e t nda d r nd he d vainwa ap o i t c u eo t ij re came ' M e Op. , uy2 20 3, c e No. e ito s r xmae a s f he nu is li d. m. 7 J l 2, 1 Do k t ' 45. On S pe e 3 , 01 ,h d fn a tfldt ei tn mo inf rs mma yj d me t e tmb r 0 2 3 te ee d n i h nsa t to o u r u g n , e as ng t sc t o dimi st a ton b aus t pl ntf hasnotcomple wih t e t ki hi our t s s he c i ec e he ai if id t he xper ce tfc ton r uie t rii a i eq r men . Di scussi on 1. D efendant sM ot on for Sum m ary Judgm ent ' i Unde Rul 56oft Fe a Rulso Ci lPr ed e,ttheco ts l g a s r e he derl e f vi oc ur lll ur hal r nt ummay r j g n i temo a ts o t a t eei n g n ieds u ea t a ymaeil a ta dt ud me t f h v n h ws h t h r s o e un ip t s o n tra f c n he mo nti enildt j va s tte o udgme a amatroflwa Fe R. v.P.5 nt s te a ' d. Ci ' 6. TheVigi aM edialM aprci Ad (S r ni c l a tce û VMM A' rquiesa pa t alegi ne i nt ' e r ny ry l ng glge ) m edi alc r t obt i a expe tc rii a i ofm e i prort s r i pr es upon t de e nt c a e o an n r e tt c ton rt i o e v ng oc s he f nda . Va CodeAnn.j8. - 1 Pr y ltga saehedt t smerquie ntf e r c rii ton . 0120.. o - ii nt r l o he a e rme or xpe t e tfcai t unde VM M A a a ot r ltga . Se J r s ny he ii nt e ohns n v. igo e N o.7: 1 c 0041 201 W L o K l r, 1 - v6, 2 35 1 a * n. ( . Va. 449 6, t 7 6 W D. Aug.1 201 .Exc ptf t r r i tnc whe t al eda to 6, 2) e or he ae nsa t n he leg c f negi nc ce ryle wihi t r ngeoft j y' co lge e la l is t n he a he ur s mmonknowldgeande re e,hef l e e xpeinc t aiur tc o ompl wih t sce tfc ton i gr mdsf dimi s l 1 ;s a s Br y t hi riia i s ot or s s a . 4, ee lo embr v.Unie Stt , y td a es No.7:0-v- 2011W L 1 741 a * ( . Va. a 1 2011.Deane v.M as No. 08cv1 e 388, 21 , t 7 W D. J n. 3, ) l v , rh, 7: - paupei,t c t dia ss ( m)wih sr ceofhi c antupo r c ptoft ne say rs he our woul ssit hi t evi s ompli n e ei he ce sr cont c i onna i f e h oft de enda s ' The pl i iff ie t a com pls s r i e or a t nf ton or ac he f nt .' a ntf a l d o c ih e v c pr de t c tw ih t nec s r c a ti o to w ihi t e ende tm e pe i a l ovi he our t he es a y ont c nf nna i n t n he xt d i r od lowed. A s a r ul,a lu m a ed de e nt w e e t r i t o J y 22, 3. es t 1 r m f nda s r e m na ed n ul 201 Concl on usi Fort r a onssatd,hedee n ' moto f s he e s t e t fnda ts in or ummayj r udgmentwilbegrntd,a l a e nd t pl ntf sm o i f a e e i o tmet s r e u me def nda swilbe de e A1 he ai if ton or n xtnson f i o e v nnn d e nt l nid. 1 ot rpe ng m oto w ilbe di m i s d asm oo ,a t a ton w ilbe sr c n f om t a tve he ndi i ns l s se t nd he c i l t i ke r he c i docke oft c t t he our . The Cl k i die t d t s nd ce tt e c esoft s m e or ndum opi on a t er s r c e o e rii d opi hi m a ni nd he ac om panyi or rt t pl i ifa a lc c ng de o he a ntf nd l ouns lofr or e ec d. ay t r 01 . ENTER:Thi Y I* d ofOcobe, 2 3 s Chi fUnied St t D i ti tJ e t a es s r c udge

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.