UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION

CASE NO. 9:20-cv-81315-WPD

AUDREY BLACK-TUREAUD,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. BARD, INC. and BARD PERIPHERAL 

VASCULAR, INC.,

Defendants.

/

JOINT MOTION FOR TEMPORARY STAY

AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW

Plaintiff Audrey Black-Tureaud (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard 

Peripheral Vascular, Inc. (collectively, “Bard”) (Plaintiff and Bard are collectively referred to as 

the “Parties”), respectfully submit this Joint Motion for Temporary Stay and Incorporated 

Memorandum of Law and request that this Court stay this case and all actions in it for a period of 

ninety (90) days to permit the Parties to finalize settlement terms with respect to this and all cases 

filed by Plaintiff’s counsel in similar matters, as the Parties have entered into a settlement in 

principle and are in the process of finalizing the details.

1 Accordingly, the Parties jointly request 

that the Court enter an order staying this case for ninety (90) days to finalize the settlement and 

file a stipulation for dismissal. 

 1 A Joint Stipulation for Dismissal Without Prejudice as to Defendant McKesson Corporation 

(“McKesson”), seeking to dismiss this case without prejudice as to McKesson, was previously 

filed with the Court. (Doc. 35).

Case 9:20-cv-81315-WPD Document 36 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2020 Page 1 of 5
2

MEMORANDUM OF LAW

Plaintiff’s counsel in this matter represents several plaintiffs with cases proceeding in this 

and other courts across the country asserting similar claims against Bard for injuries they contend 

arise out of their use of Bard’s IVC filters. The Parties have reached an agreement in principle to 

settle all claims in this matter and are in the process of finalizing settlement documents, before 

filing a stipulation for dismissal. The Parties anticipate that finalizing settlement documents for 

all cases, including this case, will take up to ninety (90) days.

This Court has broad discretion to stay proceedings as incidental to its power to control its 

own docket – particularly where, as here, a stay would promote judicial economy and efficiency. 

See Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 (1997); Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 598 (1998); 

Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936) (recognizing that the “[p]ower to stay proceedings 

is incidental to the power inherent in every court to control disposition of causes on its docket with 

economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants”); Castle v. Appalachian Tech. 

Coll., 430 F. App’x 840, 841 (11th Cir. 2011) (district courts have “inherent power not governed 

by rule or statute but by the control necessarily vested in courts to manage their own affairs so as 

to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases” (citations omitted)); Johnson v. Bd. of 

Regents of the Univ. of Ga., 263 F.3d 1234, 1269 (11th Cir. 2001) (district courts have “broad 

discretion over the management of pre-trial activities, including discovery and scheduling) (citing 

Chudasama v. Mazda Motor Corp., 123 F.3d 1353, 1366 (11th Cir. 1997) (“district courts enjoy 

broad discretion in deciding how best to manage the cases before them”); United States v. 

McCutcheon, 86 F.3d 187, 190 (11th Cir. 1996) (noting the “broad discretion which is allowed a 

trial court to manage its own docket”)); Cypress Chase Condo. Ass’n “A” v. QBE Ins. Corp., No. 

10-61987-CIV, 2011 WL 1544860, at *5 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 15, 2011) (“Federal courts routinely 

Case 9:20-cv-81315-WPD Document 36 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2020 Page 2 of 5
3

exercise their power to stay a proceeding where a stay would promote judicial economy and 

efficiency.”). 

Further, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(c) and 26(d) vest the Court with authority to 

limit the scope of discovery or control its sequence, upon a showing of good cause and 

reasonableness. Houston v. 7-Eleven, Inc., No. 2:14-CV-441-FTM-29CM, 2015 WL 412523, at 

*1 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 30, 2015). Facilitating the Parties’ efforts to resolve their dispute entirely 

through the finalization of settlement terms, where a settlement in principle already has been 

reached, is reasonable and constitutes good cause for granting the requested short-term stay of 

discovery. See, e.g., PNC Bank, Nat’l Ass’n v. Pharis, 2:18-CV-626-FTM-99CM, 2018 WL 

5807351, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 6, 2018) (finding good cause to stay proceeding for a period of 

sixty (60) days appropriate pending mediation and settlement discussions); Technocable Wiring 

Specialist, Inc. v. Genesis Networks Telecom Servs., LLC, 8:16-CV-2590-T-35MAP, 2017 WL 

7311851, at *1 (M.D. Fla. June 15, 2017) (stay appropriate while parties resolve case and finalize 

settlement).

Accordingly, the Parties respectfully request that the Court enter a stay of all activity in 

this case, for a period of ninety (90) days. The Parties have submitted a proposed Order, attached 

as Exhibit A.

WHEREFORE, the Parties jointly request a stay for a period of ninety (90) days to allow 

the Parties to finalize settlement details.

Case 9:20-cv-81315-WPD Document 36 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2020 Page 3 of 5
4

Dated: September 1, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

FEARS NACHAWATI, PLLC

/s/ Steven Schulte 

Steven Schulte

Texas Bar No. 24051306

Email: schulte@fnlawfirm.com

Eric Przybysz

Texas Bar No. 24102381

Email: ericp@fnlawfirm.com

Darren McDowell

Texas Bar No. 24025520

Email: dmcdowell@fnlawfirm.com

5473 Blair Road

Dallas, TX 75231

Telephone: (214) 890-0711

Facsimile: (214) 890-0712

Counsel for Plaintiff Audrey Black-Tureaud

GREENBERG TRAURIG, P.A.

/s/ Jay A. Yagoda

Sabrina R. Gallo

Florida Bar No. 419273

Email: gallos@gtlaw.com

Jay A. Yagoda

Florida Bar No. 84811

333 S.E. 2nd Avenue, Suite 4400

Miami, Florida 33131

Telephone: (305) 579-0500

Facsimile: (305) 579-0717

Counsel for Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and 

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

Case 9:20-cv-81315-WPD Document 36 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2020 Page 4 of 5
5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on September 1, 2020 I electronically filed the foregoing 

document with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is 

being served this day on all counsel of record on the service list below in the manner specified, 

either via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other 

authorized manner for those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically 

Notices of Electronic Filing.

/s/ Jay A. Yagoda 

JAY A. YAGODA

SERVICE LIST 

Darren McDowell

Eric Martin Przybysz

Steven Schulte

FEARS NACHAWATI, PLLC

5473 Blair Road

Dallas, Texas 75231

Email: dmcdowell@fnlawfirm.com

ericp@fnlawfirm.com

schulte@fnlawfirm.com

Case 9:20-cv-81315-WPD Document 36 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2020 Page 5 of 5