Solnoki v. C. R. Bard, Inc. et al, No. 2:2013cv15257 - Document 27 (S.D.W. Va. 2019)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The court ORDERS that the 18 & 23 motions to dismiss are GRANTED in part to the extent the moving defendants seek dismissal and DENIED in part insofar as defendants seek dismissal with prejudice; the court ORDERS that the TSL and Bard are dismissed without prejudice, no other defendants remain and the case is stricken from the docket and closed. Signed by Judge Joseph R. Goodwin on 8/8/2019. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (st)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Solnoki v. C. R. Bard, Inc. et al Doc. 27 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION IN RE: C.R. BARD, INC. PELVIC REPAIR SYSTEM PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION ------------------------------------------------THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO Tara Solnoki v. C.R. Bard, Inc. MDL No. 2187 2:13-cv-0015257 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pending are (1) Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, filed by Tissue Science Laboratories Limited (“TSL”) on March 30, 2018 [ECF No. 18]; and (2) Defendant C.R. Bard, Inc.’s (“Bard”) Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Comply with Pretrial Oder # 305, filed June 11, 2019 [ECF No. 23]. Defendants TSL and Bard assert that plaintiff’s case should be dismissed with prejudice for failure to comply with court orders, including the failure to timely provide the defendant with required pretrial discovery in violation of Pretrial Order Numbers 27, 28, 275 and 305. Plaintiff, who is pro se, has not responded to the motions. On July 10, 2019, the court entered a Show Cause Order directing plaintiff to show cause on or before July 24, 2019, why the defendants who filed the motions should not be dismissed. [ECF No. 26]. The court sent a copy of this order to plaintiff at her last known address and posted it on the court’s public website. Plaintiff did not show cause or otherwise respond. The court finds, pursuant to Rules 16 and 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and after weighing the factors identified in Wilson v. Volkswagen of Am., Inc., 561 F.2d 494, 503-06 (4th Cir. 1977), that this case should be dismissed without Dockets.Justia.com prejudice for plaintiff’s failure to respond to the show cause order and otherwise comply with discovery deadlines in compliance with the court’s previous pretrial and other orders. Therefore, the court ORDERS that the motions to dismiss [ECF Nos. 18, 23] are GRANTED in part to the extent the moving defendants seek dismissal and DENIED in part insofar as defendants seek dismissal with prejudice. The court ORDERS that the TSL and Bard are dismissed without prejudice. No other defendants remain and the case is stricken from the docket and closed. The court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this order to counsel of record and plaintiff at her last known address. ENTER: 2 August 8, 2019
]]>
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.
