United States District Court, D. Arizona
IN RE: Bard IVC Filters Products Liability Litigation,
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER NO. 40 (MULKEY BELLWETHER
G. Campbell Senior United States District Judge.
have filed a motion to remove the Mulkey case from the
bellwether trial schedule. Doc. 12990. The motion is fully
briefed and no party has requested oral argument. Docs.
13118, 13170. The Court will grant the motion.
April 2017, the parties submitted memoranda proposing
specific cases for bellwether trials from a pool of more than
40 cases. Docs. 5652, 5706. Both sides selected the Mulkey
case. Docs. 5652 at 3, 5706 at 1. Based on the parties'
submissions and oral arguments at the ninth case management
conference, the Court selected Mulkey and four other cases
for bellwether trials: Booker, Jones, Kruse, and Hyde. Doc.
5770 at 1. The Court stated that it would select a sixth
bellwether case after two bellwether trials had been
completed. Id. at 2.
Booker case was tried in March 2018 and resulted in a $3.6
million jury verdict in the plaintiff's favor. Docs.
10595, 10596. The Jones case was tried two months later and
resulted in a defense verdict. Doc. 11350.
the close of the Jones trial, the Court concluded that the
order of the next three bellwether trials should be Kruse,
Hyde, and Mulkey. Doc. 11659 at 1. The Court scheduled Kruse
for September 2018, Hyde for November 2018, and Mulkey for
February 2019. Id. at 1-2. The Court selected
Tinlin, a Recovery case, for the sixth bellwether trial in
May 2019. Id. at 4.
Court subsequently granted summary judgment in favor of
Defendants in the Kruse case. Doc. 12202. The parties agreed
that Hyde could be moved to the September 2018 bellwether
trial slot in lieu of Kruse. Doc. 11871 at 1. The Hyde trial
resulted in another defense verdict. Doc. 12891.
certain health issues experienced by Ms. Mulkey and the fact
that discovery in Tinlin was ongoing, the Court determined
that Mulkey should be tried in February 2019 and Tinlin three
months later. Docs. 12061, 12853, 12971. The Court also
determined that a sixth bellwether trial would not be
necessary. Doc. 12853 at 1. The summary judgment granted in
Kruse had resolved a sixth case.
seek to remove Mulkey from the bellwether trial schedule,
arguing that another trial involving an Eclipse filter would
be redundant and a waste of resources. Doc. 12990 at 4-6.
Defendants oppose the motion. Doc. 13118.
primary purposes of this MDL - common discovery and ruling on
common issues - have been accomplished. The parties requested
that the Court hold bellwether trials to provide insight into
how their claims and defenses would be received by juries,
with the hope that a global settlement could be achieved
before the cases are remanded. See In re Chevron U.S.A.,
Inc., 109 F.3d 1016, 1019 (5th Cir. 1997); Manual
for Complex Litigation, Fourth § 22.315 (Federal
Judicial Center 2004). The four bellwether cases resolved to
date - Booker, Jones, Kruse, and Hyde - have served this
involved a G2 filter that had experienced multiple failures,
with a fractured strut migrating to the plaintiff's
heart. See Doc. 8873 at 2. The jury found in favor
of the plaintiff on the failure to warn and punitive damages
claims, awarding $1.6 million in compensatory and $2 million
in punitive damages. Docs. 10595, 10596. Plaintiffs have
stated that this verdict provides sufficient information
regarding the estimated value of G2 cases involving fractures
and serious injuries (Doc. 13117 at 49), and neither side
proposes trying another G2 bellwether case.
involved an Eclipse filter that had experienced failures
similar to the G2 filter in Booker. The trial resulted in a
was resolved in Defendants' favor on the basis of a
statute of limitations defense. The same ...