Company: PRGO
Filing Date: 2025-05-07
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0001585364-25-000056
Chunk: 40

Company: PERRIGO Co plc
Filing Date: 2025-05-07
Form: 10-Q
Item: Item 1
Chunk 40
---
 prejudice.After the filing of Amended Complaints, on June 30, 2021, the Court again dismissed all claims against the retail and distributor defendants with prejudice and on July 8, 2021, the Court again dismissed all claims against the Company, this time with prejudice. Appeals of these dismissal orders to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit have been filed. In December 2022, the Court granted in full the brand defendants' Daubert motions, finding that Plaintiffs' causation experts' opinions were unreliable and thus inadmissible. The Court later ruled that it was appropriate to apply the same expert causation standards to the retail and distributor defendants as well as the generic defendants, and the Court thereby ruled that its Daubert decision barring Plaintiffs' expert opinions applied equally to these defendants as well. Thus, the Court's rulings on both federal preemption and scientific causation grounds dismissed all claims against the Company on two independent grounds, and are also binding on all claims remaining in the MDL Census Registry. Appeals of these orders have been filed to the 11th Circuit. The Company continues to vigorously defend itself against such claims at the appellate level.As noted above, the Company has won multiple motions to dismiss in the MDL, most recently in Illinois where the Circuit Court granted in full the Company's motions to dismiss based on federal preemption. The Company has also been dismissed from additional state court actions in California, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, New York, New Jersey, and Maryland. Plaintiffs elected not to appeal from any of those state-court dismissals, with the exception of Illinois. In April 2025, the Company reached a settlement in principle in the Illinois state court lawsuits, including in the sole case on appeal. The pending settlement is for an immaterial amount and is expected to be fully funded by insurance.Other than the MDL and state court matters that have been dismissed at the trial court level, as of March 29, 2025, the Company was also named in approximately 190 personal injury lawsuits in the state of California. In November 2024, the Company reached a settlement in principle in each of remaining Ranitidine California state court lawsuits. The pending settlement is for an immaterial amount and is expected to be fully funded by insurance. In March 2025, a New Mexico state court granted in full Perrigo’s Motion to Dismiss a ranitidine action against the Company by the New Mexico Attorney General based on nuisance and negligence theories for