Reed v. Pfizer, Inc.
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35227
E.D.N.Y2012Background
- Plaintiffs Reed allege injury from ingesting Lybrel, manufactured and sold by Pfizer and Wyeth.
- Initial complaint and amended complaint both assert various product-liability theories, including negligence and warranty claims.
- Court granted premotion conference request, allowed an amended complaint, and defendants moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim.
- Amended complaint ties Reed’s injuries to DVT, pulmonary embolus, and related health harms after Lybrel use.
- FDA-approved warnings for Lybrel are identified by the court as the relevant warnings; plaintiffs fail to plead inadequacies with specificity.
- Court grants dismissal without prejudice, with leave to amend one final time.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to warn viability | Reed alleges inadequate warnings and misrepresentation to FDA/medical community. | Warnings were adequate; plaintiff fails to plead how warnings were insufficient. | Failure to warn claim dismissed; insufficient factual detail about inadequate warnings. |
| Manufacturing defect sufficiency | Lybrel was negligently manufactured. | No facts showing a defect in the particular administered drug. | Manufacturing defect claim dismissed for lack of supporting facts. |
| Design defect viability | Lybrel's design was defective and unreasonably risky. | Lybrel’s design lacked factual support; no feasible safer alternative design pled. | Design defect claim dismissed; no feasible alternative design pled. |
| Breach of express/implied warranties | Warranties claimed that Lybrel was tested, merchantable, and safe for use. | Allegations fail to show defective product or breach of a specific warranty. | Breach of express and implied warranty claims dismissed; lack of plausible warranty breach facts. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (U.S. 2007) (pleading must show facial plausibility, not mere possibility)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (U.S. 2009) (pleadings must show plausible claims with factual support)
- Skinner v. Switzer, 131 S. Ct. 1289 (U.S. 2011) (plausibility remains key; pleadings need factual content)
- Horowitz v. Stryker Corp., 613 F. Supp. 2d 271 (E.D.N.Y. 2009) (adequacy of warranty representations requires description of the misrepresentation)