Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00606/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00606-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability

---

REED

S

MIT

H LLP

A limited liability partnership formed in the State of Delaware

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 

– 1 – 12399711

Michael K. Brown (State Bar No. 104252) 

Thomas J. Yoo (State Bar No. 175118) 

REED SMITH LLP 

355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2900 

Los Angeles, CA 90071 

Telephone: (213) 457-8000 

Facsimile: (213) 457-8080 

Steven J. Boranian (State Bar No. 174183) 

Susan B. Altman (State Bar No. 230227) 

REED SMITH LLP 

Two Embarcadero Center, Suite 2000 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: (415) 543.8700 

Facsimile: (415) 391.8269 

Attorneys for Defendant Merck & Co., Inc. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ALLEN HURLBURT 

 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

MERCK & Co.; INC AND DOES 1 

through 10 

 Defendants. 

Case No. 2:05-CV-00606-MCE-KJM 

STIPULATION AND ORDER STAYING 

PROCEEDINGS PENDING TRANSFER TO 

IN RE VIOXX PRODUCTS LIABILITY 

LITIGATION, MDL NO. 1657 

The parties, by and through their counsel, stipulate to and respectfully request a stay of all 

proceedings in this action pending the transfer of this case to In re VIOXX Products Liability 

Litigation, MDL No. 1657. 

Plaintiff Allen Hurlburt alleges personal injuries that he attributes to the prescription drug 

VIOXX®. Defendant Merck & Co., Inc. (“Merck”) manufactured and distributed VIOXX®, but 

voluntarily withdrew VIOXX® from the market on September 30, 2004. 

Case 2:05-cv-00606-MCE -KJM Document 10 Filed 04/28/05 Page 1 of 2
REED

S

MIT

H LLP

A limited liability partnership formed in the State of Delaware

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 – 12399711

On February 16, 2005, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) issued an 

order transferring 148 VIOXX®-related cases to the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Louisiana for coordinated pretrial proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 1407. Merck intends to 

seek the transfer of this action to that Multidistrict Litigation, In re VIOXX Products Liability 

Litigation, MDL No. 1657, and shortly will provide the JPML with notice of this action pursuant to 

the procedure for "tag along" actions set forth in the rules of the JPML. A stay will potentially 

conserve judicial resources and will not cause unfair prejudice to the parties. See Rivers v. Walt 

Disney Co., 980 F. Supp. 1358, 1360 (C.D. Cal. 1997) (stay pending MDL transfer decision action 

would further judicial economy because “any efforts on behalf of this Court concerning case 

management will most likely have to be replicated by the judge that is assigned to handle the 

consolidated litigation”). 

Date: April 27, 2005 

__________________________________ 

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:05-cv-00606-MCE -KJM Document 10 Filed 04/28/05 Page 2 of 2