Case Information
*1 Case 1:17-cv-01460-DLC Document 26 Filed 10/18/16 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA KAREN MACALUSO,
INDIVIDUALLY AND AS THE
PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF
THE ESTATE OF JOSEPHINE GALIANO CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS No. 16-3673
BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB ET AL. SECTION I
ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is defendants’ motion [1] to dismiss and for a more definite statement. The Court recently resolved a substantively identical motion in another
case pending before it, one involving the same defendants as this case and all of the
same lawyers. See Huffman v. Bristol-Myers Squibb et al. , Civil Action No. 16-3714,
R. Doc. No. 27. In fact, the only difference worth noting between this case and
Huffman in terms of the legal issues raised by defendants’ motion is that in this case
the plaintiff is suing individually and in a representative capacity on behalf of
Josephine Galiano, who allegedly died as the result of defendants’ product. Compl.
¶¶ 4, 13.
It follows that the result in Huffman should also govern here. Accordingly, for the same reasons provided in this Court’s order and reasons in the Huffman case, [2]
*2 Case 1:17-cv-01460-DLC Document 26 Filed 10/18/16 Page 2 of 2 IT IS ORDERED that defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as set forth herein . Plaintiff has leave to file an amended
complaint addressing the present infirmities with the failure to warn claim no later
than October 26, 2016 . Should defendants still contend that any amended
complaint does not plead causation on the failure to warn claim, defendants may file
a motion to dismiss the claim on such grounds no later than November 4, 2016 .
Should defendants do so, plaintiff shall respond no later than November 14, 2016 ,
at which point the Court will take the motion under submission.
IT IS ORDERED that defendants’ motion for a more definite statement is GRANTED. No later than October 26, 2016 , plaintiff shall file an amended
complaint specifying (1) when the decedent was injured by Eliquis, and (2) when the
decedent became aware of her injuries. Should defendants contend that dismissal on
prescription grounds is appropriate based on the pleadings, defendants shall so move
no later than November 4, 2016 . [3] Should defendants do so, plaintiff shall respond
no later than November 14, 2016 , at which point the Court will take the motion
under submission.
New Orleans, Louisiana, October 18, 2016. _______________________________________ LANCE M. AFRICK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
[1] R. Doc. No. 14.
[2] Huffman v. Bristol-Myers Squibb et al. , Civil Action No. 16-3714, R. Doc. No. 27.
[3] To be clear, failure to so move would not waive the ability to timely move for summary judgment on the issue provided that any such defense is raised in the answer. 2