Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_14-cv-01875/USCOURTS-casd-3_14-cv-01875-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 367
Nature of Suit: TORTS - Personal Injury - Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury/Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332pi Diversity-Personal Injury

---

1 

14-cv-1875-AJB-AGS 

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 

ANN MARIE ESTRADA, and JOSE 

ESTRADA 

Plaintiffs,

v. 

TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, 

INC., TEVA WOMEN’S HEALTH, INC., 

and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, 

Defendants.

 Case No.: 14-cv-1875-AJB-AGS 

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFFS 

TO FILE AN AMENDED 

SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF 

 On September 11, 2017, the Court requested that Plaintiffs’ counsel file a 

supplemental brief pointing to the specific allegations that were made during the motion 

hearing on September 8, 2017. (Doc. No. 91 at 1.) The Court specifically asked that 

Plaintiffs’ counsel “list the CM/ECF document number and bates number” for each of the 

contentions. (Id.) On September 13, 2017, Plaintiffs’ counsel filed their supplemental brief 

and on the following day, Defendants’ counsel rightfully objected. (Doc. Nos. 94, 95.) The 

Court notes that instead of following the Court’s clear directions to cite to the documents 

on the record, Plaintiffs’ counsel attached their evidence as a new lodgment, totaling over 

300 pages in length. (Doc. No. 98.) 

Case 3:14-cv-01875-AJB-AGS Document 100 Filed 10/02/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2 

14-cv-1875-AJB-AGS 

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

 In the interests of judicial economy and in deciding this case on the merits, the Court 

declines to parse through this new lodgment and then search for its corresponding 

counterpart on the record. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiffs’ counsel to file an 

amended supplemental brief citing, without argument, to the CM/ECF document number

and bates number for the same two representations: 

(1) Each of the twenty alleged complaints about embedment of the ParaGard IUD 

and its subsequent arm breakage upon removal; and 

 (2) That there were 1000 reports of breakage of the ParaGard IUD every two years. 

Plaintiffs’ counsel is to file this amended supplemental brief by the end of the day on 

Wednesday, October 4, 2017. Plaintiffs’ counsel is to make no additional arguments and 

to only cite to the documents already on the record. The Clerk of Court is directed to 

STRIKE Plaintiffs’ supplemental brief and the attached lodgments, document numbers 

94, 94-1, 98, and 98-1. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f)(1) (a court may act on a motion to strike

“on its own”); see also Sliger v. Prospect Mortg., LLC, 789 F. Supp. 2d 1212, 1216 (E.D. 

Cal. 2011) (“The court, however, may make appropriate orders to strike under the rule at 

any time on its own initiative.”). 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 

Dated: October 2, 2017 

 

Case 3:14-cv-01875-AJB-AGS Document 100 Filed 10/02/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2