# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 3- 35 56

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
Pat ric ia Free m an

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v.

W y et h; W y et h P ha rm aceu ti cal s, In c.

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an ts - App el le es

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Eas te rn Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s - Li tt le Ro ck

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: May 23, 2 01 4 Fil ed : Au gu st 13 , 20 14

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re RI LEY, Chi ef J ud ge , MELLOY and SHEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __ MELLOY, Circu it Ju dg e.

Pat ric ia Free m an was a pl ai nt iff i n a mu l ti di st ric t li ti ga ti on ("M DL") su it br ou gh t ag ai ns t W y et h Ph arm aceu ti cal s, In c., an d rel at ed en ti ti e s ( c ol le ct iv el y ,"Wy et h" ). The di st ric t cou rt di sm is se d Freem an 's case for fai lu re t o p ro se cu te an d 1
la te r de ni ed he r m ot io n t o re co ns id er. W e aff irm.

In earl y 20 09
, Free m an su ed W y et h in New Yor k st at e co ur t, al le gi ng th at sh e de ve lo pe d br eas t can cer aft er us in g W y et h's ho rm on e th erap y m ed ic at io n, Prem pr o. W y et h t im el y

rem ov ed th e cas e to th e Uni te d Stat es Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r th e So ut he rn D i st ric t of New Yor k. Sh or tl y th erea fte r, th e Ju di ci al Pan el on Mu lt id is t r i c t Lit ig at io n tra ns ferr ed th e cas e to th e East ern D i s t r i c t of Ark an sa s as pa rt of th e

on go in g In re Pre m

pr o P ro du ct s Li ab il it y

Lit ig at io n, M DL-15 07 , creat ed in 20 03

.

The cl erk of co ur t fo r th e East ern Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s o p e n e d an in di vi du al d o c k e t f o r Free m an 's cas e on May 12
, 20 09

. The ne xt da y , th e cl erk fil ed i n Free m an 's do ck et a m em or an du m th at co nt ai ne d im po rta nt in fo rm at io n (th e "t ran sf er

m em or an du m ") re ga rd in g t he MDL's u se of th e Cas e Ma na ge m en t/ Elec tro ni c Cas e Fi le s ( "CM -ECF" ) syste m

. Rel ev an t to th is ap pe al
, th e tra ns fer m em or an du m in st ru ct ed Free m an 's a tt or ne y as f ol lo ws:

Att o r n e y s are req ui red to el ect ro ni cal ly fi le do cu m en ts in th e Prem pr o Pro du ct s Liab il it y Lit ig at io n (MDL 15 07 ) an d al l rel at ed cas es , ab se nt un us ua l ci rcu m st an ces

. I f y ou ha ve no t pr ev io us ly reg is te red fo r e l ect ro ni c fil in g in th e East ern Di st ric t of Ark an sa s, y ou m us t co m pl et e th e
en cl os ed Elec tro ni c Cas e Fi li ng Reg is tra ti o n Fo rm an d

su bm it it to th e Cl erk ’s o f f i c e. Att or ne y s who do no t reg is te r fo r el ect ro ni c fil in g wil l no t rece iv e no ti ces of el ect ro ni c fil in g, no r wil l t h e y r ecei ve ha rd co pi es of

or de rs

. (S ee Ju dg e W

il so n’ s Ord er of

Se pt emb er 19

, 20 05 .)

The Hon or ab le Bi ll y Ro y W il so n, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e East ern 1 Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s.

-2

-Ju dg e Wils on 's Ord er o f Sep te m be r 19 , 20 05 , in tu rn , read as f ol lo ws:

In a Ju ly 1, 20 05 le tt er, I no ti fie d al l pa rti es th at el ect ro ni c fil in g ha d arri ve d in th e East ern D i s t r i c t of Ark an sa s. I

a l s o i nf or m ed y ou al l th at el ect ro ni c fil in g wou ld be req ui red in al l MDL-1 50 7 cas es

. . . . H o w e v er, m an y of
y ou (es pe ci al ly loc al co un se l) h av e n ot he ed ed th e cal l.

Aga in
, al l co un se l ( in cl ud in g lo cal co un se l in in di vi du al

cas es who ap pe ar on do ck et sh eet s tra ns ferr ed to th e East ern Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s) m us t re gi st er o n C M-ECF

.

. . .

You are on ce ag ai n fu ll y ad vi se d in th e pr e mi s e s, an d, if
y ou do no t reg is te r, y ou wil l no t rece iv e no ti ces of el ect ro ni c fil in g, no r wil l y ou rece iv e ha rd co pi es of or de rs

.

All co un se l ar e di re ct ed

to reg is te r, he re an d n ow.

(em ph as is in or ig in al ). Bet ween May 13
, 20 09
, an d Nov em be r 16
, 20 12
, no th in g was
po st ed to Free m an 's in di vi du al do ck et

. The n, on N o v e mber 16
, 20 12
, th e di st ric t

co ur t is su ed an or de r de si gn at in g Free m an 's cas e (an d se ve ral ot he rs ) fo r di sc ov ery. The or de r was po st ed to Free m an 's in di vi du al do ck et

. In pr ep arat io n fo r di sc ov ery, th e di st ric t co ur t in st ru ct ed Free m an to pr ov i d e u p d a te d m ed ic al au th or iz at io ns to W y et h wit hi n th ree week s an d warn ed he r th at "[f ]ailu re to d o so m ay res ul t in di sm is sa l fo r fai lu re to pr os ecu te ." The di st ric t co ur t ha d is su ed a si m il ar warn in g to
ot he r li ti ga nt s in th e MDL on ly a few m on th s pr io r. Tha t warn in g was po st ed to th e MDL's m ai n do c k e t a n d w a s ad dr es se d to "ALL CASES." On Ja nu ary 8, 20 13
, W y et h m ov ed to di sm is s Free m an 's cas e be c a u s e s h e ha d no t pr ov id ed th e m ed ic al

au th or iz at io ns pe r th e di st ric t co ur t's in st ru ct i o n s

. Th e di st ric t co ur t gr an te d th e

m ot io n o n J an ua ry

28 , 20 13

.

-3

-Nearl y ni ne m on th s la te r, Free m an 's at to rn ey fil ed a Ru le 60 (b )(1 ) m ot io n to

se t as id e th e di sm is sa l. In th e m ot io n, he rep res en te d th at he ha d "m on it or ed th e cas e, in cl ud in g th e ti m e pe rio d fo ll owi ng it s tra ns fer to th e East ern Dis tri ct ." Des pi te hi s

as se rte d m on it or in g, ho wev er, he di d no t reg is te r fo r CM- ECF syste m in th e East ern Dis tri ct un ti l Oct ob er 2 2, 2 01 3– –t he da y he fil ed hi s m ot io n to va cat e th e d is m is sa l

or de r. As a co ns eq ue nc e of fai li ng t o r e g i s t e r fo r th e MDL's CM- ECF syste m , Free m an 's at to rn ey di d no t rece iv e el ect ro ni c no ti ces of th e fil in gs in Free m an 's cas e, in cl ud in g th e di st ric t co ur t's in it ia l or de r de si gn at in g th e cas e fo r d i s c o v e r y, th e

m ot io n to di s m is s fo r fai lu re to pr os ecu te , or th e di st ric t co ur t's or de r gr an ti ng th e

mo t i on

. The di st ric t co ur t de ni ed Free m an 's 60 (b )(1 ) m ot io n to se t as id e th e jud gm en t. Fre em an ap pe al s. 2

"Th e de ni al of a Ru le 60 (b ) m ot io n is rev ie wed fo r an ab us e of d is cret io n." Gay do s v. Gui da nt Co rp

. (In re Gui da nt Co rp

. Im pl an ta bl e Defi br il la to rs Pro ds

. Liab

. Lit ig
., 49 6 F.3 d 86 3, 86 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 ) ("I n re Gui da nt Co rp ."). An a b u s e of di sc ret io n oc cu rs whe n th e "d is tri ct co ur t's jud gm en t was ba se d on cl earl y erro ne ou s fact -fi nd in gs or erro ne ou s co nc lu si on s of la w." Id

. Ru le 60 (b )(1 ), am on g ot he r th in gs , pe rm it s a di st ric t co ur t to se t as id e a jud g men t e n t e r e d be cau se of a pa rty's
"ex cu sa bl e ne g l e c t

. " In re Gui da nt Co rp ., 49 6 F.3 d at 86 6. To de te rm in e whe th er

co nd uc t is ex cu sa bl e, c o u r t s c on si de r se ve ral fact or s, in cl ud in g: "(1 ) th e da ng er of

pr ejud ic e to th e no n- m ov in g pa rty; (2 ) th e le ng th of th e de la y an d it s po te nt ia l im pa ct

on jud ic ia l pr oc eed in g s ; ( 3 ) whe th er th e m ov an t act ed in go od fai th ; an d (4 ) th e

reas on fo r t h e de la y , in cl ud in g whe th er it was wit hi n th e reas on ab le co nt ro l of th e

m ov an t." Id

. (ci ti ng Pi on eer In v. Serv

. Co

. v. Bru ns wick Ass oc

. Ltd

. P's hi p, 50 7 U.S.
38 0, 39 5 (1 99 3)

. Th e reas on fo r th e de la y is a "k ey fact or in th e an al y si s," In re Gui da nt C o r p

. , 49 6 F.3 d at 86 7, bu t th e ex cu sa bl e ne gl ect in qu iry "i s at bo tt om an

W e no te th at Free m an do es no t (an d can no t) ap pe al th e un de rlyin g Ru le 41 (b ) 2 di sm is sa l; if s he di d, we wo ul d n ot ha ve juri sd ic ti on to rev ie w it . See Fed. R. Ap p. P

. 4( a) (ap pe al s fro m di st ric t co ur t or de rs , in th e ab se nc e of a st at ut or y ex ce p t i o n , m us t b e ta ke n wi th in 30 da y s af te r th e en try of jud gm en t).

-4

-eq ui ta bl e on e, ta ki ng acco un t of al l rel ev an t ci rcu m st an ces su rro u n d i n g th e pa rty's

om is si on ," Pi on eer, 5 07 U.S. at 3 95

.

In th is cas e, we can no t sa y th at th e di st ric t co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n whe n it refu se d to se t as id e it s or de r of di sm is sa l. W e ha ve reco gn iz e d t ha t "ad m in is te rin g

cas es in m

ul ti di st ric t li ti ga ti on is di ffer en t fro m ad m in is te rin g c a s e s o n a ro ut in e do ck et ," In re Gui da nt Co rp ., 49 6 F.3 d at 86 7 (ci ta ti on om it te d)
, an d th at to en co ur ag e effi ci en cy , "M DL co ur ts m us t be gi ve n gr eat er di sc ret io n to or ga ni ze, co or di na te an d ad jud ic at e it s pr oc eed in gs , in cl ud in g th e di sm is sa l of cas es fo r fai lu re to co m pl y wit h it s or de rs ," id

. App lying th is pr in ci pl e to th e pr es en t case is cl ear eno ug h: on m or e th an on e o c c a s i o n , th e di st ric t co ur t in st ru ct ed al l at to rn ey s to reg is te r fo r th e CMEC F syste m an d warn ed th at th os e who di d no t wou ld no t rece iv e el ect ro n i c f i l i n g

no ti ces or ha rd co pi es of or de rs

. The req ui rem en t to reg is te r was se t ou t in th e cl erk 's

tra ns fer m em or an du m th at was po st ed to Free m an 's in di vi du al do ck et

. Th i s w as du rin g th e ti m e whe n Free m an 's at to rn ey rep res en te d th at he was m on it or in g th e cas e.

Fu rth er, th e di st ric t co ur t's or de r de sig na tin g dis co ve ry in Free m an 's cas e, da te d
Nov em be r 16
, 20 12
, warn ed th at fai lu r e to pr ov id e W y et h wit h up da te d m ed ic al

au th or iz at io ns "m ay r e s u lt in di sm is sa l fo r fai lu re to pr os ecu te ." In ad di ti on , th e di st ric t co ur t ha d is su ed a si m il ar warn in g (wh ic h was p l a c e d o n t h e MDL's m ai n do ck et ) th ree m on th s ea rli er i n d en y in g a m ot io n t o d is m is s fo r fai lu re to pr os ecu te

as m oo t. Ju dg e W il so n s tro ng ly hin te d t he n t ha t h e wou ld co ns id er d is m is sa l i f th e pl ai nt iff s' at to rn ey s di d no t pr o vi de th e up da te d m ed ic al au th or iz at io ns in a ti m el y fas hi on . That is what ha pp en ed he re.

It is an un fo rtu na te ou tc om e th at Free m an wil l no t rece iv e he r da y in co ur t du e
t o h e r at to rn ey 's ap pa ren t pr of es si on al care le ss ne ss

. And we reco gn iz e th at o u r ci rcu it ge ne ral ly pr efer s m eri ts di sp os it io ns ov er de fau lt jud gm en ts

. See, e.g ., Uni te d
St at es v. Rea l P r o p s

. l o c at ed at 72 15 Lon gb oa t Dr., 75 0 F.3 d 96 8, 97 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 14 ). Bu t th at in te res t m us t be weig he d ag ai ns t th e un iq ue pr ob le m s an MDL jud ge

-5

-face s, es pe ci a l l y w he n th e MDL li ti ga ti on in vo lv es hu nd red s of at to rn ey s

rep res en ti ng th ou sa nd s of cl ie nt s. The MDL jud ge m us t be gi ve n "g reat er di sc ret io n"

to crea te an d en fo rce de ad li ne s in or de r to ad m in is tra te th e li ti ga ti on effe ct iv el y

. Thi s

ne ces sa ril y in cl ud es th e po wer to di sm is s cas es whe re li ti ga nt s do no t fo ll ow th e

co ur t's or de rs

. See In re Gui da nt Co rp ., 49 6 F.3 d at 86 7. In th e fin al an al y si s, an d in th e pr oc ed ur al po st ur e of th is a p p eal

–– rev ie w of a Ru le 60 (b ) m ot io n– –we do no t fin d th is to be an "ex cep ti on al " cas e warra nt in g rel ie f. In t'l Bd of Elec . Work ers v. Hop e Ele c. Co rp ., 29 3 F .3d 40 9, 4 15 (8t h C ir. 2 00 2)

.

Affi rm ed

.

__

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-6

-