FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T OCTOB ER 27, 2011 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 12 17 7 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNos . 1: 08 -cv -0 37 01 -TW T

1: 07 -m d- 18 45 -TW T TIMOTHY T. MITCHELL, In di vi du al ; an d a s n ex t fr ie ndfor JEM , a m in orch il d; an d a s n ex t fri en d fo r ADM, a m in orch il d, DONNA KAYE MITCHELL, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Pl ai nt iff s - Ap pe ll an ts , vers us CONAGRA FOODS, INC., ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Defen da nt- App el le e.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e North ernDis tri ctof Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Oct ob er 2 7, 2 01 1) Befo re BARKETT, PRYOR an d F AY, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM:Don naMi tc he ll an d Ti m ot hy Mit ch el l, i nd iv idua ll y an d a s n ex t fr ie ndfor J.E.M. an d A.D.M. (co ll ect iv el y , th e p la in ti ffs ), ap pe al anadve rs e su m m ary jud gm en t o n t he ir c la im s ag ai ns t Co nAg ra Fo od s, In c. Afte r car efu l re vi ew, we affi rm . Thi s ca se ari se s o utof C on Agr a’s 20 07 reca ll of P et er Pa n a ndGreatValu e pe anutbu tt er, aft er the CDC an d F DA rep orte d a n a ss oc ia ti on be twee n t he se pr oduc ts an d S al m on el laTenn es se e. Fo ll owi ng th e rec al l, the pl ai nt iff s fi le d t hi s act io n i n Tex as st at e co urt, al le gi ng th atth ey co nt ract edSal m on el lo si s, a b act eri al in fect io n c au se d b y

Sal m on el laTenn es se e, aft er ea ti ng Pet er Pa n o r GreatValu e pe anutbu tt er. Co nAg ra re m ov edth e act io n o n d iv ers it y gro un ds to th e U.S. Dis tri ctCo urt fo r th e North ernDis tri ctof Tex as , andth e act io n was th en tra ns ferr edto th e North ernDis tri ctof Ge or gi a fo r co ns ol id at edpre tri al pr oc eed in gs with h un dr ed s o f si m il ar p ers on al in jury lawsu it s ag ai ns t Co nAg ra i n Inre: Co nAg ra Pe anutBu tt er Pro du ct s Li ab il it y Lit ig at io n, No . 1: 07 -m d- 01 84 5 (th e “ MDL”). Afte r th e cas e was tra ns ferr ed , th e d is tri ctco urt en te reda cas e m an ag em en t or de r th atst at es : Inli euof s erv ic e o f do cu m en ts pu rs uantto Fed .R.Ci v.P . 5, s erv ic e o f al l p ap ers sh al l b e m ad e o n l ia is on co un se l fo r pl ai nt iff s ... [p ]lain ti ffs ’ li ai so n c ou ns el sh al l b e res po ns ib le forth e rec ei ptan d 2di ss em in at io n o f eac h s erv eddo cu m en t t o a ll kn ownpl ai nt iff s' co un se l. The cas e m an ag em en t o rd er al so requi redall fil in g i n t he cas e to be pe rfo rm ed el ect ro ni cal ly in ac co rd an ce wi th th e co urt’s p ro cedur es on ele ctro ni c fi li ng . The co urt’s p ro cedur es , pera North ern Dis tri ctof Ge or gi a St an di ng Orde r av ai labl e o n th e co urt’s web si te , requi redall att orne y s i n g oo d s ta nd in g a dm it te d t o p ract ic e be fo re the Bar o f th e co urt, i nc lu di ng att orne y s ad m it te d p ro ha c v ic e, to reg is te r fo r acc es s t o t he co urt’s Ca se Man ag em en t/ Elec tro ni c Cas e Fi li ng (CM/ ECF) syste m . See No rth ernDis tri ctof Ge or gi a St an di ng Orde r # 0 4- 01 In R e: Pro cedur al Ru le s fo r Elec tro ni c Cas e Fi li ng in Civ il an d C riminal Cas es . The MDL pl ai nt iff

s’ li ai so n c ou ns el was areg is te redus er o f th e North ernDis tri ctof Geo rg ia 's C M/ ECF s y st em , bu t the pl ai nt iff s’ cou ns el in th is cas e d idno t re gi st er fo r CM/ ECF acc es s u nt il th e se co ndweekof S ep te m be r, 20 10 , app ro xi m at el y two y ears aft er the cas e was tra ns ferr edto th e North ernDis tri ctof Ge or gi a. On J un e 1 5, 2 01 0, b efo re the pl ai nt iff s’ cou ns el inth is cas e reg is te redfor CM/ ECF acc es s, the di st ric t co urt en te redanord er re qu iri ng th e p la in ti ffs to co m pl et e a two- pa ge cas e st atus rep ort b y Ju ly 2, 20 10 . The p la in ti ffs fai le d t o subm ita cas e st atus rep ort b y th atda te . As a res ul t, o n Au gu st18 , 20 10 , th e di st ric t co urt en te redanord er re qu iri ng th atth e p la in ti ffs sh ow caus e why the

3m at te r sh ou ldno t b e d is m is se d wi th pre jud ic e fo r fai lure t o fi le a cas e st atus rep ort. The pl ai nt iff

s fa il edto res po ndto th e sh ow caus e o rd er, s o, o n S ep te m be r 2, 2 01 0, the co urt d is m is se d the pl ai nt iff s’ cla im s wi th pre

jud ic e. The fo ll owi ng da y th e co urt m ai le d t he di sm is sa l o rd er t o t he pl ai nt iff s, an d app ro xi m at el y

on e weeklat er the pl ai nt iff

s m ov edforreco ns id erat io n a ndto setasi de th e d is m is sa l. The di st ric t co urt g ran te d the pl ai nt iff s’ m ot io n a ndrei ns ta te d t he cas e o n Sep te m be r 15 , 20 10 . Mea nwh il e, on Ju ly 7, 20 10 , Con Agr a m ov edforsu m m ary jud gm en t o n t he gr ou ndth atth e p la in ti ffs ’ al le ge d o ns etof s y m pt om s o ccu rredpri orto th e m anuf actur e o f th e p ean utbu tt er the pl ai nt iff s al le ge d t he y

pu rch as ed . The pl ai nt iff s n ev er re sp on de d t o C on Agr a’s m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t. As a res ul t, o n S ep te m

be r 16 , 20 10 , on e d ay

aft er the di st ric t co urt re in st at edth e pl ai nt iff s’ cas e, itgrant edCo nAg ra s umm ary jud gm en t. The pl ai nt iff s t he n m ov ed fo r rec on si de rat io n o f th e su m m ary jud gm en t o rd er, arg ui ng th atth ey ne ve r rece iv edno ti ce o f Co nAg ra’s s umm ary jud gm en t o rd er an d t ha t d is pu te d i ss ue s o f m at eri al factpre cl ud edsu m m ary jud gm en t, b utth e d is tri ctco urt d en ie d the ir m ot io n. On ap pe al , th e p la in ti ffs fir starg ue th aton ce the cas e was di sm is se d o n Sep te m be r 2, 2 01 0, Co nAg ra’s J ul y 7, 2 01 0, m ot io n fo r su m

m ary jud gm en t was 4ren de redm oo t. The y cit e n o autho rity

for th is po si ti on . Nor d o t he y expl ai n h ow Co nAg ra’s fai lu re t o re ne w it s s umm ary jud gm en t m ot io n u nf ai rly preju di ced th em . As th e p la in ti ffs ’ res po ns e to th e su m m ary jud gm en t m ot io n was du e o n Ju ly 28, 2 01 0, ac co rd in g t o t he lo cal rul es , th e m ot io n was rip e fo r ad jud ic at io n whe n the di st ric t co urt ru le d o n i t. Itwas n otne ces sa ry , th eref or e, fo r Co nAg ra t o ren ew it s m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t i n o rd er fo r th e d is tri ctco urt t o ru le on it . The pl ai nt iff

s n ex t ar gu e th atth ey

ne ve r rec ei ve d n ot ic e o f Co nAg ra’s m ot io n fo r su m

m ary jud gm en t b efo re i t was grant ed . There is no di sp ut e, ho wev er, tha t the MDL pl ai nt iff s’ li ai so n c ou ns el was p ro pe rly serv edwith a ll pl ead in gs , m ot io ns , andord ers in th e cas e. And , un de r th e co urt’s ca se m an ag em en t o rd er, tha t s erv ic e co ns ti tu te d s erv ic e o n the pl ai nt iff s. Mo reo ve r, th e p la in ti ffs pro fes se d l ackof kno wled ge of t he pe nd in g s umm ary jud gm en t m ot io n o nl y

res ul te d fr om

th ei r own att orne y ’s fai lu re t o m ai nt ai n c on ta ctwith t he MDL pl ai nt iff

s’ li ai so n c ou ns el an d t o t im el y reg is te r fo r th e CM /ECF syste m , whi chth e d is tri ctco urt’s ca se m an ag em en t o rd er an d s tand in g o rd er re qu ire d. Bas edon th es e fac ts , th e d is tri ctco urt d idno t err inco nc lu di ng th atth e p la in ti ffs were n otrel ie ve d o f th ei r du ty to re sp on d t o C on Agr a’s m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t o r pr os ecu te th ei r cas e. The pl ai nt iff

s al so arg ue th atdi sp ut edis su es of m at eri al factex is te d t ha t 5pr ecl ud edsu m m ary jud gm en t. Ho wev er, as th e p la in ti ffs fai le d t o re sp on d t o Co nAg ra’s m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t, the y

waiv edth is arg um en t. Tran sa m eri ca Leas in g, In c. v. In st itut e o f Lon do n Un de rwri te rs , 26 7 F .3d13 03 , 13 08 n.1 (11 th Cir . 20 01 ). The d is tri ctco urt d idno t ab us e it s d is cret io n i n refu si ng to co ns id er thi s ar gu m en t wh enth e p la in ti ffs rai se d i t i n t he ir Rul e 5 9 m ot io n fo r rec on si de rat io n, as su cha m ot io n c anno t b e u se d t o “ rel it ig at e o ld m at te rs , rai se arg um en t o r pr es en t ev id en ce tha t co ul d h av e b een rai se d p rio r to th e en try of jud gm en t.” M ic ha el Lin et , Inc . v. Vil la ge of Well in gt on , Fla ., 40 8 F .3d 75 7, 7 63 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ). Last ly, th e p la in ti ffs arg ue th atCo nAg ra’s co un se l co m m it te d fr au d o n t he co urt i n fa il in g t o p ers on al ly not ify the m th ata m ot io n fo r su m

m ary jud gm en t was pe nd in g a ndin fai li ng to att ach cert ai n e vi de nc e to it s m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t. Ho wev er, ev enif we a ccep t the se all eg at io ns as t ru e, no ne of t hi s co nduc t co ns ti tu te s fr au d o n t he co urt. As we ex pl ai ne d abo ve , servi ce o n t he MDL pl ai nt iff

s’ cou ns el co ns ti tu te d s erv ic e o n t he pl ai nt iff s, an d C on Agr a h adno du ty to at ta ch an y

of t he pl ai nt iff

s’ evi de nc e to it s m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t. Fo r th e fo reg oi ng reas on s, we af firm th e d is tri ctco urt’s g ran t o f su m m ary jud gm en t i n fa vo r of

Co nAg ra. AFFIRMED. 6