Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01317/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01317-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 245
Nature of Suit: Real Property Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability

---

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

JOINT STATUS REPORT 

CASE NO. 2:05-CV-01317 FCD GGH 

1750612V1 

92016V1 

C. Brooks Cutter, State Bar No. 121407 

Stuart C. Talley, State Bar No. 180374 

KERSHAW, CUTTER & RATINOFF LLP 

980 9th Street, Suite 1900 

Sacramento, California 95814 

Telephone: (916) 448-9800 

Facsimile: (916) 669-4499 

Attorneys for PLAINTIFF, 

on Behalf of Himself and the General Public 

Timothy A Pratt (admitted pro hac vice) 

Deborah A. Moeller (admitted pro hac vice) 

Dana N. Gwaltney, SBN 209530 

Sara J. Romano, SBN 227467

SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P. 

333 Bush Street, Suite 600 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Telephone: (415) 544-1900 

Facsimile: (415) 391-0281 

Attorneys for Defendants 

GUIDANT CORPORATION 

and GUIDANT SALES CORPORATION 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

FRED CORFEE, on behalf of himself and the 

general public, 

 Plaintiffs, 

v. 

GUIDANT CORPORATION, an Indiana 

corporation; GUIDANT SALES 

CORPORATION, an Indiana sales corporation; 

and DOES 1-25, 

 Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 2:05-CV-01317 FCD GGH 

ORDER 

Case 2:05-cv-01317-FCD-GGH Document 23 Filed 09/12/05 Page 1 of 4
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 2 

JOINT STATUS REPORT 

CASE NO. 2:05-CV-01317 FCD GGH 

1750612V1 

92016V1 

A. Summary of the Claims: This is a products liability case filed as an individual action 

and as a class action by Fred Corfee against Defendants relating to certain Guidant 

defibrillators implanted in Mr. Corfee and other members of the putative class. 

B. Status of Service: Guidant has been served and has answered. 

C. Joinder of Additional Parties: Not contemplated at this time. 

D. Contemplated Amendments to the Pleadings: None at this time. 

E. Statutory Basis for Jurisdiction and Venue: This Court has jurisdiction over this 

class action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332 in that the matter in controversy exceeds 

$5,000,000 and there are members of the Class who are citizens of a difference state 

than defendants. Venue is also proper in this District. 

F. Anticipated Discovery and Scheduling Discovery: There presently are several 

pending motions seeking to transfer and consolidate a number of cases, under 28 

U.S.C. 1407 in the proceedings entitled In re: Guidant Corp. Implantable 

Defibrillators Products Liability Litigation, MDL Docket No. 1708. The MDL Panel 

is set to consider those motions on September 29, 2005. In the interim, discovery 

relating to virtually all the defibrillators covered by the requested MDL litigation is 

proceeding in the Brennan case before Judge Hamilton in Indiana. Accordingly, 

counsel herein has agreed with Defendants to not proceed with discovery in this case 

and to rely on the Brennan discovery pending the resolution of the MDL motion 

before the MDL Panel. If the MDL Panel does consolidate these cases in front of a 

single Federal Judge, it is anticipated that discovery will proceed in that Court. If the 

MDL Panel denies the motion to consolidate, then counsel herein have agreed to 

conduct a further Rule 26(f) conference and at that time propose a schedule and 

address the other matters contemplated by the Court’s Order Requiring Joint Status 

Report. For the Court’s consideration, the parties have submitted a proposed order to 

this end. 

Case 2:05-cv-01317-FCD-GGH Document 23 Filed 09/12/05 Page 2 of 4
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 3 

JOINT STATUS REPORT 

CASE NO. 2:05-CV-01317 FCD GGH 

1750612V1 

92016V1 

G-N. See above. The parties anticipate addressing these issues in detail pursuant to a 

further Rule 26(f) conference if the MDL Panel does not consolidate this litigation. 

Dated: _____________. KERSHAW, CUTTER & RATINOFF LLP 

By: /s/ C. Brooks Cutter 

(as authorized on September 1, 2005) 

C. BROOKS CUTTER 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

Dated: _____________. SHOOK, HARDY & BACON LLP 

 By: ____________________________________________ 

 DANA N. GWALTNEY 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

 GUIDANT CORPORATION and 

 GUIDANT SALES CORPORATION 

 

 

Case 2:05-cv-01317-FCD-GGH Document 23 Filed 09/12/05 Page 3 of 4
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 4 

JOINT STATUS REPORT 

CASE NO. 2:05-CV-01317 FCD GGH 

1750612V1 

92016V1 

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, in accordance with the agreement between the parties, that the 

deadlines for all parties to participate in pretrial proceedings in this matter shall be extended pending 

a transfer decision by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”). 

The deadline by which the parties must participate in any pretrial proceedings -- including 

initiation of discovery requests, participation in pretrial disclosures or activities in connection with 

FED. R. CIV. P. 16 and 26, and L.R. 16-240, and attendance at any meet-and-confer conferences or 

hearings -- is as follows: (a) if those motions to transfer and consolidate are granted by the JPML, a 

deadline set by the transferee court; or (b) if those motions are denied by the JPML, no earlier than 

sixty (60) days after such denial. 

 

Dated: September 9, 2005 /s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

 THE HONORABLE FRANK C. DAMRELL 

Case 2:05-cv-01317-FCD-GGH Document 23 Filed 09/12/05 Page 4 of 4