Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-5_06-cv-05154/USCOURTS-arwd-5_06-cv-05154-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Product Liability

---

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION

MARY JANE CAMPBELL PLAINTIFF

v. Case No. 06-5154

DAVOL INC., a Rhode Island corporation;

C.R. BARD, INC., a New Jersey corporation;

SURGICAL SENSE, INC., a Texas corporation;

JOHN DOE I; JOHN DOE II; JOHN DOE III;

JOHN DOE IV; and JOHN DOE V DEFENDANTS

ORDER

Now on the 16th day of January, 2007, comes on for

consideration Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (doc. #5). The

Court, having reviewed the pleadings of the parties, and all

other matters of relevance before it, finds and orders as

follows:

1. Separate defendants Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.,

filed the instant motion in response to the plaintiff’s

complaint. During the course of the parties’ briefing of the

motion, the plaintiff moved, and was allowed to amend her

complaint. The plaintiff’s amended complaint was filed herein on

December 4, 2006. 

2. Although the separate defendants have not filed a

pleading in response to the amended complaint, attorneys for the

separate defendants have informed the Court that the issues

Case 5:06-cv-05154-JLH Document 20 Filed 01/16/07 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>
2

presented by the original motion to dismiss (doc. #5) are

applicable to the amended complaint. 

2. Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

allows for dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which

relief can be granted. When ruling on a motion to dismiss under

Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a district

court “must accept the allegations contained in the complaint as

true and all reasonable inferences from the complaint must be

drawn in favor of the nonmoving party.” Young v. City of St.

Charles, 244 F.3d 623, 627 (8th Cir. 2001). Although dismissal

for failure to state a claim can only be granted when it appears

beyond a reasonable doubt that plaintiff can prove no set of

facts in support of a claim entitling him to relief, “dismissal

under Rule 12(b)(6) serves to eliminate actions which are fatally

flawed in their legal premises and deigned to fail, thereby

sparing litigants the burden of unnecessary pretrial and trial

activity.” Young, 244 F.3d at 627. 

Under Rule 12(b)(6), the Court is obliged to decide a motion

to dismiss with reference only to the pleadings and attachments

thereto. However, upon the Court’s review of the instant motion,

it appears that “matters outside the pleadings” have been

presented for this Court’s consideration. Therefore, the Court

Case 5:06-cv-05154-JLH Document 20 Filed 01/16/07 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>
3

should, at this time, and considering that an amended complaint

has been filed, deny the motion, as moot. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

12(b)(6). 

The separate defendants are hereby instructed to respond the

amended complaint, in whatever fashion they see fit, within the

ten (10) days from the date of this Order. 

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss

(doc. #5) is moot, and is therefore, denied as such.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

/s/ Jimm Larry Hendren

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:06-cv-05154-JLH Document 20 Filed 01/16/07 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>