Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-01310/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-01310-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT REID, on behalf of himself and

all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOHNSON & JOHNSON and McNEIL

NUTRITIONALS, LLC,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No. 11cv1310 L (BLM)

ORDER GRANTING

DEFENDANTS’ EX PARTE

MOTION TO FILE

SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY IN

SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’

MOTION TO DISMISS [doc. #46]

Defendants seek to file supplemental authority in support of their motion to dismiss. 

(Doc. 46.) In the alternative, Defendants move to strike portions of the complaint. (Id.) 

Specifically, Defendants wish to supplement the record with: (1) a recent Ninth Circuit decision,

Carrea v. Dreyer’s Grand Ice Cream, Inc., 2012 WL 1131526 (9th Cir. 2012) and (2) the

February 21, 2012 Federal Register, 77 Fed. Reg. 9842.

The Court finds that Defendants show good cause here for supplementing the record. The

Ninth Circuit’s Carrea decision, although unpublished, directly concerns Defendants’ express

preemption argument in their motion to dismiss. (MTD at 10–14.) 

The February 21, 2012 Federal Register states that the FDA intends to extend the period

of time it exercises “enforcement discretion concerning the health claim for phytosterols and risk

of coronary heart disease[.]” 77 Fed. Reg. 9842 (2012). The FDA’s position, as stated in the

11cv1310

Case 3:11-cv-01310-L-BLM Document 53 Filed 09/18/12 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Federal Register, directly concerns Defendants’ argument that Plaintiff’s claims are barred by

the primary jurisdiction doctrine. (MTD at 15–18.) Because the Federal Register was published

after the briefing closed on the motion to dismiss, Defendants are not at fault for bringing this

matter to the Court’s attention at this time. In addition, Defendants would be prejudiced if the

Court does not consider this recent federal administrative record in its order for claims

surrounding plant stanol esters. Accordingly, the Court will grant Defendants’ application to file

supplemental authority.

Based on the foregoing, the Court hereby GRANTS Defendants’ ex parte application to

file supplemental authority in support of Defendants’ motion to dismiss with the decision from

Carrea v. Dreyer’s Grand Ice Cream, Inc., 2012 WL 1131526 (9th Cir. 2012) and to file

supplemental authority in support of Defendants’ motion to dismiss with the February 21, 2012

Federal Register, 77 Fed. Reg. 9842 (2012).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 17, 2012

M. James Lorenz

United States District Court Judge

COPY TO: 

HON. BARBARA L. MAJOR

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ALL PARTIES/COUNSEL

2 11cv1310

Case 3:11-cv-01310-L-BLM Document 53 Filed 09/18/12 Page 2 of 2