Motion-Secondary: GWENDOLYN CULVERSON vs BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM PHARM et al

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                128992

E-FILED
NO 128992 12/28/2022 12 48 PM
CYNTHIA A GRANT.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT CLERK

GWENDOLYN CULVERSON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v ) Cook County Case No 2022-L-10287
) Madison County Case No 2021-L-000915
BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM ) .
PHARMACEUTICALS, )
INC etal, .
: ) FILED
Defendants )

JAN 0.4 2022

DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TOyais y, RTINEZ
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REMAND TO MADISON CORSUERSEGU couRT

Barely two months ago, Plaintrff Gwendolyn Culverson and her counsel asked this Court
to consolidate her claims with those of nearly 600 other plaintiffs who allege that using Zantac or
generic ranitidine caused them inyury ! At that tue, Plaintrff Culverson asserted that “[t]he risk of
meonsistent rulings in other cases volving the same questions would lead to incongruous results
among plaintffs and foster distrust of the legal system” (Ex 1 at 7) Plaintiff's concerns
apparently were remarkably short-lved Now, before those consolidated pretrial proceedings have
begun—even before the assigned judge has held an mtial case management conference—PlamtifF
requests a premature remand that would squander the benefits of pretrial consolidation at the outset
of this proceeding and risk mconsistent judgments on aumerous common factual and legal sssues
This request should be dened for two reasons

First, the Motion for Remand (“Mot ”) 1s a clear attempt at forum-shopping In her orgmal
motion to consolidate, Plamtiff offered many reasons why the remamung pretnal proceedings in

' See Ex 1, Plaintaff’s Motion to Transfer and Consolidate Cases for Pretrial Purposes Only
Under IHmois Supreme Court Rule 384, filed Oct 14, 2022

~]-

SUSMITTED 20821653 Elzabeth Villa 12/28/2022 1248 PM128992

her case were best addressed alongside other Zantac cases This Court agreed Since then, the only
relevant intervening event has been the selection of a consolidation judge other than the one
Plaintiff preferred, and to whom she would now Itke her case returned immediately—in a county
far from where she resides To seek remand on this basis 1s improper and should not be
countenanced by this Court

Second, the Motion 1s premature The judicial officer selected to preside over the
consolidated litigation, Judge Dantel Trevino of Cook County, has not even had the opportunity
to conduct an initial conference (it 1s scheduled to occur on February 1, 2023) That conference 1s
ltkely to address, among other topics, the process and timmg for resolving dispositive motions on
core legal issues common to many cases—including Plaintiff's Judge Trevmo should have the
opportunity to decide, mn the first instance, which factual and legal issues are most appropriate for
consolidated treatment If the Court remands Plaintiff's case now, it will revive the very msk of
inconsistent rulings that Plamtiff herself identified just two months ago as a chief Justification for
consoldation under Rule 384 The Court should allow Judge Trevino to manage the Illmois Zantac
docket in an orderly manner and deny Plaintiff's motion

I THE MOTION IS AN IMPROPER ATTEMPT AT FORUM-SHOPPING

Plaintiff argues that remand 1s appropriate now because her case ts “nearly trial-ready” and
in a different procedural posture than other consolidated actions (Mot at 5-6) These arguments
present, at best, an incomplete picture of the procedural posture of Culverson and do not warrant
remand now But more to the point, Plaintiff could have made these precise arguments two months
ago Instead, she asked this Court to consolidate her claims with those of 600 other plaintiffs
Nothing has occurred since then that materrally affects the posture of Plamtiff’s case relative to

those other Zantac actions The only change 1s that this Court consolidated the Ittigation but did

-~2~

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elizabeth Villa 12/28/2022 12 48 PM128992.

not asstgn it to the yudge or county Plaintiff requested That 1s not a proper reason to seek remand
under Rule 384, and the Court should deny the Motton on that basis alone

As this Court has acknowledged, “courts have never favored forum shopping ” Dawdy v
Union Pac RR Co , 207 Ill 2d 167, 174 (2003) In the related forum non conveniens context, for
example, this Court has stated that “[b]y itself, forum shoppmg ‘furntshes no legal reason for
sustaming’ a plaintiff's choice of forum ” Jd at 175 (quoting Pratt Tool & Supply Co vy Windham,
379 P 2d 849, 850 (Okla 1963)) Especially when, as here, “the plaintiff 1s foreign to the forum
chosen and the action that gives nse to the litigation did not occur in the chosen forum,” thus Court
has found it “reasonable to conclude that the plaintiff engaged m forum shopping to suit his
individual interests, a strategy contrary to the purposes behind the venue rules ” Jd at 174 (quoting
Certain Underwriters at Lloyds, London v Iilmors Central R R Co ,329 1k App 3d 189, 196 (2d
Dist 2002)) Of particular relevance here, a plamtiff’s desire to choose a particular forum “cannot
be permitted to override the public interest m, and need for, an erderly, effictently operated
judiceal system —the precise goal that anmated this Court’s Rule 384 transfer order Id at 175
(quoting Espinosa v Norfolk & Western Ry Co , 86 Ill 2d 111, 123 (1981)) (emphasis added)

A brief review of the procedural posture of this case confirms that the Motion 1s an exercise
1m judge- and forum-shopping Pretrial proceedings m Culverson are not yet complete—cnitical
evidence depositions remain to be taken,? and summary yudgment motions have not yet been
briefed, argued, or decided The transferor court m Culverson has not received, let alone ruled on,

motions im Inmme, exhibit objections, or deposition designations Although the case 1s more

? Plauntiff recently canceled the evidence depositions of her Chicago-based primary care
provider (Dr DeLeon) and oncologist (Dr Eggener) without rescheduling them See Ex 2 (Oct
18, 2022 email from Plaintiffs counsel canceling deposition of Dr DeLeon), Ex 3 (Nov 28, 2022
email from Plamtiff’s counsel canceling deposition of Dr Bggener)

-~3-

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elizabeth Villa 12/28/2022 1248 PM128992

advanced than others before Judge Trevino, that fact ts as true now as It was several weeks ago, in
October 2022, when Plaintiff first sought consoldation At that time, Plaintiff took a very different
position on the portance of her case proceeding alongside the others

« Plaintiff wamed that consolidation before a single judge was tmportant “so that
a party could not defeat the purpose of consoltdation by filmg a substitution-
of-judge motion ” (Ex 1 at 8, emphasis added)

* Plaintiff argued that consolidation would “promote the just and efficient
admmustration of claims and issues ratsed and avord potentially inconsistent
rulings and reltef that will affect the course of this litigation from the
beginning” (Id at 7, emphasis added )

« Plamtiff expressed concern that “[t]he risk of mtconststent rulings in other
cases involving the same questions would lead to incongruous results
among plan ffs and foster distrust of the legal system” (Id , emphases added )

As in October 2022, significant pretrial tasks remain in the case, including depositions and
summary Judgment motion practice But since then, this Court decided to consolidate Culverson
and other Zantac matters m Cook County (where Plaintiff actually resides) and not before the
Judicial officer Plaintiff requested in Madison County (where Plaintiff prefers to litigate) 3 It 1s no
coincidence that this development precipitated Plaintiffs abrupt about-face on where the
remaining pretrial proceedings im her case should occur This 1s judge- and forum-shopping, which

1s an improper basis on which to seek remand

11 THE MOTION IS PREMATURE AND RAISES THE SPECTER OF
INCONSISTENT RULINGS

Considerations of gamesmanship aside, remand at this stage 1s premature The consolidated
Iutigation ts only in its infancy the logistics of forming a consolidated docket are ongoing, and
Judge Trevino has scheduled an inital status conference for February 1, 2023 (See Mot Ex A)

At thts early juncture, the court has not even had an opportunity ¢o pursue the benefits of

3 See Bx | at 5 (Plaintiff requesting consolidation before Judge Sarah Smith, to whom her
case was originally assigned in Madison County and to whom she now seeks remand)

~4—

SUBMITTED 20821653 Ehzabeth Villa 12/28/2022 12 48 PM

©128992

consolidation that Plaintiff highlighted in her original motion “to eliminate duplicative discovery
and pretrial litigation, prevent mconsistent pretmal rulings, promote judicial economy, and
conserve judicial resources” (Ex | at 6) Judge Trevino should have the chance to pursue those
goals and decide for himself, in the first stance and as the judicial officer closest to the overall
litigation, which pretrial matters are sufficiently “common” to benefit from centralized
consideration Consolidated proceedings should get underway before this Court considers whether,
in effect, to end them for one or more cases

The risks associated with a premature remand are not merely hypothetical As Plamtiff
herself argued in October, “inconsistent rulings” in “cases involving the same questrons would
lead to incongruous results” and even “foster distrust of the legal system ” (Jd at 7 ) Here, there
are a variety of legal issues on which a premature remand could lead to inconsistent results For
example, dispositive motions are now pending m numerous consolidated cases Those motions
raise legal issues common to Culverson, including whether plaintiffs who used generic ranitidine
may pursue a theory of “innovator lability” under Ilmnois law against current or former branded
Zantac manufacturers despite having not used those manufacturers’ products * Remanding now
would risk uconsistent rulings between Judge Trevino and the Madison County court on these
tmportant and potentially dispositive common issues

Snmularly, Ms Culverson’s claimed injury, kidney cancer, 1s also alleged by at least 70

other plainttffs in the consolidated litigation Given that these other plamtiffs are likely to offer the

4 See, eg, Ex 4-Brand Defendants’ Combined Motron to Dismiss Under 735 ILCS 5/2-
301 and 735 ILCS 5/2-615 m Ross v Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals Inc et al ,No 2022-
L-001316) The Ross case 1s one of several pending before Judge Trevino in which Defendants
have asserted the defense that Illinois law does not recognize plaintiffs’ proposed theones of
“innovator lability” and “predecessor hability ” See zd at 6-10 Those issues have now been fully
briefed before Judge Trevino in Ross, and they are also presented in Culverson and will hkely be
the focus of summary-judgment motion practice

5

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elizabeth Vila 12/28/2022 1248 PM128992

same kidney cancer general causation expert opinions im their cases, Defendants will ask Judge
Trevino to decide the admissibility of these opimons in a manner applicable to all such cases
Indeed, the judge presiding over the Zantac multi-district litigation (“MDL”), Judge Robin
Rosenberg, followed a sumilar docket-wide process m ruling on the admissibility of general-
causation expert opinions ° And, of course, Judge Trevino’s rulings on identical kidney cancer
expert opinions should apply consistently and with equal force to all kidney-cancer plaintiffs in
the consolidated actions—not all except Ms Culverson Judge Trevino should thus have the
opportunity to prioritize these general-causation questions for resolution on an efficient, docket-
wide basis, without the risk of premature remands leading to inconsistent rulings on the
admissibility of similar (if not identical) expert scientific causation opmions

Finally, even on trial-specific matters such as deposition designations, motions m1 imine,
and exhibit lists, there will inevitably be common-issue disputes that will arise in many cases (for
example, regarding company witness testimony or company exhibits) and are therefore best left to
the judge overseeing the full htigation Neither the Culverson case nor the Bayer case (which was

pending before the same transferor court) progressed to rulings on these evidentiary issues. Again,

5 Plaintiff attempts to downplay Judge Rosenberg’s recent MDL order excluding all of
plaintiffs’ general causation experts and granting summary judgment to defendants because
plaintiffs could not present a triable issue on general causation Jn re Zantac (Ramtidme) Prods
Liab Ling, __F Supp 3d__, 2022 WL 17480906, at *167-68 (S D Fla Dec 6, 2022) Plaintiff
here suggests that opinion has limited relevance because it concerned “different cancers than those
at issue in these Illinois proceedings ” (Mot at 3 n 2) What Plaintiff fails to acknowledge 1s that
the MDL plamtiff leadership counsel actually abandoned claims based on certain cancers because
of the lack of supporting scientific evidence and chose to advance claims based on other cancers
(That leadership counsel included one of Ms Culverson’s counsel here ) Yet, Judge Rosenberg
found even that subset of cancers scienttfically unsupportable So while it 1s true that the current
Illmors consolidated proceeding involves many drfferent cancers not directly addressed by Judge
Rosenberg, this ts because those cancers did not even make it to motion practice in the MDL—not
because they have some presumed evidentiary support

~6--

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elzabeth Villa 12/28/2022 12 48 PM128992

Judge Trevino ts 1n the best position to determme which issues fit this description and which are

best left for remand

There 1s no reason for this Court to intervene now, mere weeks after consolidation, to

micromanage how the circuit courts will share responsibility in this tigation The Court should

let the Rule 384 process proceed as mtended so that the smgle judge responsible for pretrial

proceedings can make informed judgments about case management

CONCLUSION

Defendants respectfully request that the Court deny PlaintufP's motion

Dated December 28, 2022

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elzabeth Villa 12/28/2022 1248 PM

Respectfully submitted,

és/ Tarek Ismarl

Tarek Ismail

GOLDMAN ISMAIL TOMASELLI
BRENNAN & BAUM LLP

200 S Wacker Drive, 22"! Floor
Chicago, IL 60606

Telephone (312) 881-5969
Facstmile (312) 881-5189

Email tismail@goldmanismail com

4s/ with consent of Erik Snapp
Enk Snapp

DECHERT LLP

35 West Wacker Drive, Suite 3400
Chicago, [L 60601

(312) 646-5828

Email erik snapp@dechert com

Attorneys for Defendants GlaxoSmithKime
LIC and GlaxoSmithKline Holdmgs
(Americas) Inc

és/ with consent of Julia Zousmer
Juha Zousmer

KING & SPALDING LLP
110N Wacker Drive, Suite 3800
Chicago, IL 60606SUBMITTED 20821:

Elzabeth Villa 12/28/2022 12 48 PM

128992

8

Tel (312) 995-6333
Fax (312) 312-995-6330
Email jzousmer@kslaw com

Atorney for Defendants Boehringer
Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc

s/ with consent of Bart Sullrvan
Bart Sullivan

FOX SMITH LLC

1 Memorial Drive, Suite 1200 St Lours, MO
63102

Tel (314) 571-7887

Email bsullvan@foxsmithlaw com

Attorney for Defendant Pfizer Inc

/s/ with consent of Erin Pauley
Erm Pauley

Sarah Jin

BARNES & THORNBURG LLP
One North Wacker Drive Suite 4400
Chicago, IL 60606

Drrect (312) 214-4598

Mobile (317) 446-3097

Enn Paul tlaw com

Sarah jm@btlaw com
Attorney for Defendant Walgreens Co128992

CER’ ‘CATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certify that on December 28, 2022, a copy of the foregoing
document, having been electronically submitted to the Clerk of the Supreme Court, was also
mailed to the following persons at the addresses shown via first class mail
Ins Y Martinez
Cook County Circuit Clerk
50 W Washington, Suite 1001
Chicago, IL 60602-1305
Thomas K McRae
Madison County Circuit Clerk
155 N Mann Street, Suite 120
Edwardsville, IL 62025

The undersigned further certifies the foregoing document was also sent on December 28,
2022 via email to the addresses indicated below

Under penalties as provided by law pursuant to Section 1-109 of the Cade of Civil
Procedure, the undersigned certifies that the statements set forth in this instrument are true and

correct, except as to matters therein stated to be on mformation and behef and as to such matters

the undersigned certifies as aforesaid that he verily believes the same to be true

¢s/ Tarek Ismail

Tarek Ismail

-9~

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elmabeth Vila 12/28/2022 12 48 PM128992

Parties’ Counsel
Via email

Defendant

Counsel

IVAX Pharmaceuticals, LLC, Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc , Watson
Laboratories, Inc , and Actavis Mid
Atlantic LLC

Jonathan T Barton, #6257357
Ashley E Benoist, #6322413
STANTON | BARTON LLC
8000 Maryland Avenue, Suite 450
St Louis, MO 63105
314-455-6500

314-455-6524 (Fax)
jbarton@stantonbarton com.
abenoist@stantonbarton com

Gregory E Ostfeld # 6257163
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
77 West Wacker Drive Suite 3100
Chicago, IL 60601

312-476-5056

312-899-0420 (Fax)
ostfeldg@gtlaw com

Lori G Cohen (pro hac vice)

Sara K Thompson (pro hac vice)
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
3333 Piedmont Rd NE, Suite 2500
Atlanta, GA 30305

678-553-2100

CohenL@gtlaw com
ThompsonS@gtlaw com

Ajanta Pharma Ltd , Ayanta Pharma
USA Inc

Neal Seth

WILEY REIN LLP
2050 M Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
202-719-7000
nseth@wiley law

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elmabeth Vila 12/28/2022 12.48 PM

= 10--128992

Albertson’s Companies, Inc , Duane
Reade Inc , Giant Eagle, Inc , Rite Aid
Corporation, Safeway, Inc , Yon
Companies Inc

Sarah E Johnston

BARNES & THORNBURG LLP
2029 Century Park East, Suite 300
Los Angeles, California 90067
Telephone (310) 284-3880
Facsimile (310) 284-3894

sarah johnston@btlaw com

ErinM Pauley

Sarah Jin

Amy R Michelau

BARNES & THORNBURG, LLP
One North Wacker Dr, Ste 4400
Chicago, IL 60606 (312)214-4598
epauley@btlaw com

gyn@btlaw com
amichelau@btlaw com

William J Burton

BARNES & THORNBURG, LLP
1000N West Street, Suite [500
Wilmington, DE 19801
302-300-3451

William burton@btlaw com

Amuneal Pharmaceuticals LLC

Jonathon Drews

ULMER & BERNE LLP

500 W Madison Street, Suite 3600
Chicago, Illmois 60661

Tel 312-658-6500

Fax 312-658-6501

Jjdrews@ulmer com

ANI Pharmaceuticals Inc

Elyse D Echtman

STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP
1114 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036
212-378-7551
eechtman@steptoe com

Apotex Corp

Ann Quems

BLANK ROME LLP
130.N [8th Street

One Logan Square
Philadelphia, PA 19103
215/569-5674
aquerns@pblankrome com

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elzabeth Villa 12/28/2022 1248 PM

-I1l--128992

Appco Pharma LLC

Jordan Scott Cohen

WICKER SMITH O’HARA MCCOY & FORD
515 E Las Olas Blvd

Sunte 1400 Suntrust Center

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301

945-847-4834, 954-760-9353 (fax)
jcohen@wickersmith com

Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc , and
Aurohealth LLC

Wilham D Shultz, Jr

Candice Kusmer

MANNING GROSS & MASSENBURG, LLP
1405 N Green Mount Road, Suite 400
O'Fallon, IL 62269

Telephone (618) 277-5500

Facsimile (618) 277-6334

wshultz@mgmlaw com

ckusmer@mgmlaw com

Dr Reddy’s Laboratories, Inc and Dr
Reddy’s Laboratortes Louisiana, LLC

William D Shultz, Jr 406207607

Candice C Kusmer #06284948

MANNING GROSS + MASSENBURG LLP
1405 Green Mount Road, Suite 400
O'Fallon, IL 62269

Telephone (618) 277-5500

Facsimile (618) 277-6334
wshultz@mgmlaw com

ckusmer@mgmlaw com

John R Ipsaro (pro hac vice)
Megan B Gramke (pro hac vice)
ULMER & BERNE LLP

312 Walnut Street, Suite 1400
Cineinati, OH 45202
Telephone (513) 698-5000
Facsimile (513) 698-5001
Jipsaro@ulmer com
mgramke@ulmer com

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd

Alex Cameron Walker

MODRALL, SPERLING, ROEHL, HARRIS &
SISK, PA

500 Fourth Street, NW, Surte 1000
Albuquerque, NM 87102

505-848-1861

awalker@modrall com

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elizabeth Vila 12/28/2022 12 48 PM

~12—128992

Granules India Ltd , Granules USA
Inc

John F Cooney

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP
John cooney@lewisbnisbois com

Mark Twain Plaza II

103 W Vandalia Street, Suite 300

Edwardsville, IL 62025

Phone 618-307-7290

Kaiser Permanente International

‘Moe Keshavarzi

| SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON
333 South Hope Street, 43rd Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90071

213-620-1780

mkeshavarz1@sheppardmullin com

Robert J Guite

SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON
Four Embarcadero Center, 17th Floor

San Francisco, Calrforma 94111-4109

Phone 415 434 9100

Fax 415 434 3947

rguite@sheppardmullin com

Novitrum Pharma LLC

Amy Leigh Baker

WILSON, ELSER, MOSCOWITZ, EDELMAN &
DICKER, LLP

111 North Orange Avenue, Surte 1200

Oriando, FL 32801

407-203-7563, 407-648-1376 (Fax)

Amy baker@wilsonelser com

Par Pharmaceutical, Inc

Daniel Alvarez Sox

REED SMITH LLP

1001 Brickell Bay Drive, Suite 900
Miami, FL 33131

| 786-747-0200, 786-747-0299 (Fax)
dsox@reedsmuth com

Patheon Manufacturing Services LLC

John T Williams (# 6199208)

Michael J Morrison (#6290286)
HINKHOUSE WILLIAMS WALSH LLP
180 North Stetson, Suite 3400

Chicago, IL 60601

Telephone (312) 784-5411
Jwillams@hww-law com

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elizabeth Vila 12/28/2022 1248 PM

~13--128992

Perrigo Research & Development
Company

Perrigo Company, L Perngo Co and

Patrick W Stufflebeam, #6279455
Wayne D Skigen, #6275930
TRESSLER LLP

110 Rottingham Court, Suite B
Edwardsville, IL 62025

Phone (618) 800-1391

Fax (312) 627-1717
pstufflebeam@tresslerllp com
wskigen@tresslerllp com

Richard M Bames (ARDC No 6339950)

Sean L Gugerty (ARDC No 6339952)
Matthew H Tranter (ARDC No 6339951)
GOODELL, DEVRIES, LEECH & DANN LLP
One South Street, 20th Floor

Baltumore, Maryland 21202

410-783-4024 rmb@gdldlaw com
sgugerty@gdldlaw com

mtranten@gdidlaw com

Services Inc , and Chattem, Inc

Sanofi-Aventis US LLC, Sanofi US

W Jason Rankin
HEPLERBROOM LLC

130N Main Street PO Box 510
Edwardsville, IL 62025

(618) 656-0184 Telephone

(618) 656-1364 Facsimile
wyr@heplerbroom com

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc
and Ranbaxy, Inc

Audrey D Mense, # 6302524
THOMPSON COBURN LLP

55 East Monroe Street 37th Floor
Chicago, IL 60603

Telephone (312) 580-5035
Facsimile (312) 580-2201
amense@thompsoncobum com

Jason M Reefer (pro hac vice)

PIETRAGALLO GORDON ALFANO BOSICK
&RASPANTI, LLP

One Oxford Centre, 38th Floor

Pittsburgh, PA 15219

Telephone (412) 263-1840

Facsimile (412) 263-2001

jJmr@pietragallo com

SUBMITTED 20821683 Ebzabelh Villa 12/28/2022 1248 PM

--14--128992

Walmart Inc F/K/A Wal-Mart
Stores, Inc and Sam’s West, Inc

Wilham F Northnp

Harley V Ratcliff

William P Geraghty

Devin A Moss

SHOOK HARDY & BACON
111.8 Wacker Drive, Suite 4700
Chicago, IL 60606

(816) 474-6550

wnorthrip@shb com
hratcliff@shb com

wgeraghty@shb com
dmoss@shb com

Sandoz Inc

Stephen A Wood

CHUHAK & TECSON P C

30 South Wacker Drive, Suite 2600
Chicago, Illinois 60606

Tel 312-201-3400

Fax 312-444-9027

Fum1D 70693

SWood@chuhak com

Donald R McMinn
HOLLINGSWORTH LLP

1350 1 Street, NW

Washington, DC 20005

Tel 202-898-5800

Fax 202-682-1639
DMcminn@Hollingsworthllp com

Strides Pharma, Inc

Joseph Orlet

HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP

190 Carondelet Plaza, Suite 600
St Louis, MO 63105-3433

Tel 314 480 1927

Joseph Orlet@huschblackwell com

Douglas M Tween (pro hac vice)
John W Eichihin (pro hac vice)
LINKLATERS LLP

1290 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10104

Tel (212) 903-9072

douglas tween@Iinklaters com

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elizabeth Villa 12/28/2022 1248 PM

-15-—-128992

OptumRx Inc

Shevon D B Rockett
DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP
51 West 52nd Street

New York, NY 10019
212-415-9357

Rockett shevon@dorsey com

Wockhardt USA LLC and Wockhardt
Americas, Inc

Clifford Katz

KELLEY DRYE & WARREN LLP
3 World Trade Center

175 Greenwich Street

New York, NY 10007

(212) 808-7800

ckatz@kelleydrye com

Lead Plamtiff(s)

Counsel

Culverson, Daugherty

R Seth Crompton

Eric D Holland

Greg Jones

HOLLAND LAW FIRM, LLC
211N Broadway, Ste 2625

St Lous, MO 63102

(314) 241-8111 Telephone
scrompton@hollandtrallawyers com
eholland@hollandtnallawyers com
gjones@hollandtnallawyers com

Culverson, Daugherty, Devriendt,
Donaldson, Gillespie, Jackson,
McGruder, Ross, Salahuddin, Sheary,
Stigger, Wade, Wolf

Ashley Keller

Nicole Berg

JJ Smidow

KELLER POSTMAN LLC

150N Riverside Plaza, Sutte 4270
Chicago, IL 60606

(312) 741-5220 Telephone
ack@kellerpostman com

neb@kellerpostman com
y smdow@kellerpostman com

Culverson, Daugherty

Ann E Callis

Erika Stassi

HOLLAND LAW FIRM, LLC
1324 Niedringhaus Ave

Granite City, IL 62040

(618) 452-1323 Telephone
acallis@hollandtriallawyers com
estassi@hollandtniallawyers com

SUBMITTED - 20821653 Elzabeth Villa 12/28/2022 12 48 PM

~16--128992

Culverson, Daugherty

Alexandra Walsh

WALSH LAW PLLC

1050 Connecticut Ave , NW, Ste 500
Washington D C 20036 (202) 780-3014
awalsh@alexwalshlaw com

Alli, Baalman, Ballard, Wilhams,
Wolff, Wulf

John A Bruegger

Justin R Parafinczuk
PARAFINCZUK WOLF PA
9050 Pines Blvd Suite 450-02
Pembroke Pines, FL 33024
Tel (954) 462-6700

Fax (954) 678-4122
jbruegger@parawolf com
Jparafinczuk@parawolf com

Donaldson, Sheary, Wolf

David Matthews

Enc Cardenas

MATTHEWS & ASSOCIATES

2905 Sackett Street

Houston, TX 77098

713-522-5250
dmatthews@thematthewslawfirm com
ecardenas@thematthewslawfirm com

Donaldson, Sheary, Wolf

Rich Freese

FREESE & GOSS

3500 Maple Avenue #1100
Dallas, TX 75219
214-761-6610
tum@freeseandgoss com

Hawkins

James G Onder

W Wyhe Blar

Lawana S$ Wichmann
Gregory J Pals
ONDERLAW, LLC

110 E Lockwood Avenue
St Louis, MO 63119
Onder@onderlaw com
Diawr@onderlaw com
wichmann@onderlaw com
pals@onderlaw com.

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elizabeth Vila 12/28/2022 1248 PM

~17--128992

Martin, Nelson, Wade (Finken only)

Pete Flowers

MEYERS & FLOWERS LLC

3 North Second Street, Suite 300
St Charles, IL 60174
630-232-6333
pyf@meyers-flowers com

Tracy Finken

ANAPOL WEISS

130N 18th Street, Suite 1600
Philadelphia, PA 19103
215-735-1130
tfinken@anapolweiss com

Burke, Wolff

Edward A Wallace
Timothy E Jackson
Jessica Kaminski
WALLACE MILLER
111 W Jackson Blvd Suite 1700
Chicago, IL 60604

T 312261 6193

F 312275 8174
eaw@wallacemiller com
tey@wallacemiller com
jk@wallacemiller com.

SUBMITTED 20821653 Etzabeth Villa 12/28/2022 1248 PM

= 18 ==128992

NO 128992
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS
GWENDOLYN CULVERSON,

Plantff,

v Cook County Case No 2022-L-10287
BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM
PHARMACEUTICALS,

INC etal,

meee

Defendants
INDEX OF SUPPORTING RECORD

Index of Supporting Record

1 Plamtiff’s Motion to Transfer and Consolidate Cases for Pretrial
Purposes Only Under [lmois Supreme Court Rule 384,

~ filed Oct 14, 2022

2 October 18, 2022 Email from Plaintiff's Counsel

3 November 28, 2022 Email from Plaintff’s Counsel

4 Brand Defendants’ Combined Motion to Dismiss Under
735 ILCS 5/2-301 and 735 ILCS 5/2-615 in Ross v Boehringer
Ingetheim Pharmaceuticals Inc et al, No 2022-L-001316

3 Affidavit of Tarek Ismail

001

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elizabeth Villa 12/28/2022 12 48 PM

Madison County Case No 2021-L-000915

26

33
35128992

EXHIBIT 1

002

SUBMITTED - 20821653 Ehzabeth Villa 12/28/2022 12 48 PM128992

428997
E-FILED
xo 10/14/2022 1111 AM
— CYNTHIA'A GRANT.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT CLERK
GWENDOLYN CULVERSON,
Plaintiff,
v Madison County No 2021-L-000915
BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC, et al,
Defendants

MOTION TO TRANSFER AND CONSOLIDATE CASES FOR PRE-TRIAL PURPOSES
ONLY UNDER ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT RULE 384

Pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 384, Plaintiff n the above-captioned action, by
her attorneys, moves this court for entry of an order (1) transferring for consolidated pretnial
proceedings (and only for pretrial proceedings) the above-captioned action and all other pending
actions alleging that defendants’ Zantac and ranitidine-containing products caused the plamtiffs
to develop cancer, (2) designating the above-captioned action (winch 1s scheduled to go to trial
in five months) as the lead case for such consolidated pretrial proceedings, and (3) ordermg that
all future cases filed in Illinois state courts be transferred to the Cireutt Court of Madison
County In the alternative, should the Court determme that the Circuit Court of Madison County
1s not an appropriate venue for consolidated pre-trial proceedings, Plaintiff requests that the
Court consolidate these cases for pretnal proceedings in Circuit Court of St Clair County In

support of this motion, Plaintsff subroits a supporting record and states as follows

SUBMITTED 19805846 Andy Ho 10/14/2022 1111 AM
003

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elizabeth Villa 12/28/2022 1248 PM128992

128997

Introduction and Summary of Argument
1 There are now at least 26 cases (on behalf of 583 plamntiffs), in three different

Ilinois counties (Madison, St Clair, and Cook Counties), relating to cancer caused by the
defective heartbum drug Zantac and 11s generic equivalents Each of the cases raises numerous
commion (if not identical) questions of fact and Jaw making this a tatlor-made situation for
apphcatton of Rule 384 Generally, each case alleges that defendants manufactured or sold
Zantac (or its generic equivalent called ranitidine) (collectively Zantac and generic equivalents
shall be referred to herein as “Ranitidime Contaming Products”) All plaintiffs allege that
Ranitidme-Contaming Products are defective because they contain and/or degrade into the
known carcinogen N-Nitrosodtmethylamme (“NDMA”) All plaintiffs further allege that because
the Ramitidme-Containing Products contained excessive amounts of NDMA, the products they
ingested caused their cancer and resulted in damage .

2 Without a Rule 384 transfer, there 1s a significant chance of burdensome and.
duplicative discovery and pretrial litigation and inconsistent pretrial rulings Further,
coordination will also serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses by allowing the partes
to better coordinate document discovery and depositions of key witnesses And, Madison County
makes emment sense as a transferee forum No county has more expenence with these cases than
Madison County, and Culverson 1s scheduled to go to tral ma mere five months As such,
Plamtiff requests the Court designate Culverson, the first-filed action in Madison County, as the
lead case for all such actions

Background

3 These cases anse out of the myunes suffered by plamtiffs who ingested

defendants’ Ramtidine-Containing Products Platntiffs allege that these products—which

contained excesstve amounts of a known carcinogen (NDMA)—caused plamtiffs to develop
2

SUBMITTED 19895846 AndyHo 1011472022 1111 AM

004

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elizabeth Vila 12/28/2022 12 48 PM128992

128997

cancer, leading to substantial pain and suffering, serrous long-term health consequences, and, in
some cases, death

4 Zantac 1s the branded name for ranittdine, a drug defendants marketed as a safe
and effective antacid Ranitidine-Containing Products were sold to consumers for nearly four
decades until the Food and Drug Administration recalled it from the market m 2020, after an
mdependent laboratory discovered that ranitidine transforms inside the body and outside the
body into NDMA !

s NDMA 1 a well-known potent carcmogen It was first discovered as a byproduct
of manufacturing rocket fuel Today, its only use 1s to induce cancerous tumors in antmals as part
of laboratory expenments Unsurpnsingly, there 1s no recommended daily dose of NDMA, the
ideal level of exposure 1s zero Yet, during the entire time Ranitidtne-Containing Products were
on the market, consumers, like plaintiffs, regularly and unknowmgly, ingested stgmficant
amounts of NDMA

6 Plaintiffs’ claims against defendants include strict habihty for design defect, stnct
hability for failure ta warn, negligence, and negligent misrepresentation, and loss of consortium

7 There are 583 plaintiffs in all of the Illinoys cases subject to this motion Of those,
388 are plaintiffs in nine actions filed sice August 16, 2022, in three different IJlinois counties

The following 1s a chart identifying all of the Illinois cases subject to this motion

Name and Case No County Date Filed ye a 1605
Culverson v Boehringer Ingelheim Madison
1 | Pharmaceuticals Inc etal 2021-L- (Smith, ) 8/02/2021 1
000915
2 To be sure, Zantac ts now avatlable over-the-counter with a different formulation and 1s

called Zantac 360 That xt 1s stil] sold using the Zantac name, 1s a testament to how powerful the
brand name Zantac ts with consumers

SUBMITED 19895648 AndyHo 1014/2022 4111 AM
005

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elizabeth Villa 12/28/2022 12468 PM128992

128997

Daugherty et al y Boehringer Ingelheun
Pharmaceuticals Inc et al 22-LA-0076

St Clair

1/27/2022

Ross v Boehringer Ingethem
Pharmaceuticals Inc, et al,
2022L001316

Cook

28/2022

Wade v Teva Pharmaceuncals USA,
Inc et al ,2022L004852

Cook

5/31/2022

Wolfv Boehringer Ingelhem
Pharmaceuticals Inc , et al ,22-LA~
00397

Madison

5/31/2022

Donaldson» Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc et al ,2022-LA-
0429

Madtson

3/25/2022

Shearyv Boehringer Ingelhemm
Pharmaceuticals, Inc , et al ,2022-LA-
0428

Madison
(Smith, J)

3/31/2022

Sutherland v Boehringer Ingetheum
Pharmaceuticals Inc etal,
20221004186

Cook

5/9/2020

Bonnay Walgreen Co, et al , 2020 L
004916

Cook

5/5/2020

Mosele v Walgreen Co et al , 2020 L
008581

Cook

8/14/2020

Hawkins et al v Does John 1-100 et al,
2020 L 009784

Cook

9/11/2020

Wolff Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuttcals, Ine et al ,2021 L
012721

Cook

12/21/2021

Burke v Boehringer Ingelherm
Pharmaceuticals, Inc, et al ,2021 L
012849

Cook

12/23/2021

Martin y Amneal Pharmaceuticals LEC,
ef al , 2022 L 001985

Cook

2/28/2022

Nelson v Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals Inc et al , 2022 L,
002908

Cook

3/28/2022

Gillespie et al v Walgreen Co, et al,
2022-LA-001007

Madison

8/16/2022

48

Jackson et al vy Walgreen Co, et al,
2022-LA-001012

Madison

8/17/2022

SUBMITTED 19698845 Andy Ho 10/84/2022 1111 AM

006

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elzabeth Villa 12/28/2022 12 48 PM128992

128997

18 Dement al v Walgreen Co etal, | coop 8/17/2022 2
19 ee v Walgreen Co , etal, 2022-L- Cook al 1/2022 8
20 Saleluddin a al y Walgreen Co, et al ,, St Clair 8/18/2022 20
a MoGruder ¢ a a vy WalgreenCo etal, St Clar Si18/2022 55
2 jalard v Walgreen Co, et al, 2022 LA Saat ) 9/22/2022 n
2B Beaman 7 Walgreen Co, et al , 2022 oa ) 9/22/2022 n
aw ams aes ae eenCo, etal, | stadson | g/2210022 n
5 alten Walgreen Co, etal, 2022LA | visson | 9/26/2022 58
2g | Bilfy Walgreen Co, etal,202LA | vtedison | 9/26/2022 57

8 As can be seen from this list of cases, Culverson v Boehringer Ingelhem
Pharmaceuticals Inc, et al ,2021L000915 has been pending in Madison County.since August
2021 before the Honorable Sarah Smuth Given Judge Smuith’s extensive experience with Zantac-
related cases, and her experience in the US Armed Forces, Judge Smith would be an excellent
choice to oversee any such consolidated proceeding As the judge assigned to the Culverson
case, there can be no doubt that Judge Smith 1s the most expenenced judge mn Il:nois with
respect to the claims at issue in these cases In the Bayer case, Judge Smith has presided over
weekly case management conferences with the parties and ruled upon multiple motions to
dismiss, numerous summary judgment and Frye motions In fact, in February 2023, Judge Smith
will preside over a tral for Plaintiff Culverson Beyond Judge Smith’s expenence overseeing
Culverson, she 1s well-suited to manage the consolidated pretrial proceedings in all 26 cases as a

5

SUBMITTED 19895846 Andy Ho 10/14/2022 1114 AM

007

SUBMITTED 20821653 Ebzabeth Villa 12/28/2022 1243 PM128992

128997

result of her vast trial experience and decades-long military service She has particrpated mn
numerous trials as a civilian, and she was certified as IIlino1s’ first mulitary judge following
completion of the intensive JAG Military Judge Course Her legal and leadershtp expertise will
ensure effective and efficient pretrial proceedings for the consolidated cases

Discusston,

9 The above-listed cases, currently pending in different counties, should be
transferred for consolidated pretrial proceedings under Rule 384 to eliminate duplicat:ve
discovery and pretrial Ihngation, prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings, promote judicial economy,
and conserve judicial resources Further, coordination will serve the convemence of the parties
and witnesses by allowing the parties to better coordinate document discovery and depositions of
key witnesses As such, plaintiff requests that the Court designate the Cufverson action as the
lead action for these cases and assign Judge Smuth to oversee the coordinated proceeding

10 Rule 384(a) provides that “[w}hen crvil actions mvolving one or more common
questions of fact or law are pending in different judicial circuits” and this Court “determines that
consolidation would serve the convemence of the parties and witnesses and would promote the
Just and efficient conduct of such actions,” the Court may “transfer all such actions to one
Judicral ciremt for consolidated pretrial, tal, or post-trial proceedings ”

u The multiple cases, currently pending 1n three different [lmois counties, presents
a quintessential situation m which Rule 384 reef 1s warranted There 1s significant overlap in the
case participants All plaintiffs are individuals who developed cancer after ingesting Ranitidine-
Containmg Products, and the defendants are entities that manufactured or sold Ranitidine-
Containing Products to the plaintiffs The defendants m each action are nearly identrcal

12 Most importantly, these cases all present a substantial number of identical (let
alone common) questions of law and fact concerning the nsks of defendants’ Ranitidine-

6

SUBMITTED 18895846 AndyHo 10/14/2022 1111 AM
008

SUBMITTED 20821653 Ebkzabeth Villa 12/28/2022 12 48 PM128992

128997

Contammg Products, the defendants’ warnings concerning those products, and the manner in
which defendants marketed and promoted their products Each plamntiff seeks the same relief
damages to compensate them for the myuries caused by the defendants’ conduct

13 These cases are appropmiate for transfer and consolidation because the common
questions of law and fact relating to defendants’ conduct would otherwise require duplicative
discovery in each case Pretrial coordination will relieve the parties of burdensome duplicative
wmitten and deposition discovery of defendants What’s more, ensuring that all discovery
proceeds according to the same ESI protocol and under the same protective order—both of
which have already been negotzated and entered in the prior cases before Judge Smith—will
prevent the need to re-produce or re-classify documents in mdividual cases pending before
different judges

14 Pretrial coordination will also ard in managing the significant wntten discovery
plaintiffs expect will be directed to them A smele template Plamtff Profile Form and Plamtif
Fact Sheet will ensure that Plaintiffs can efficiently assemble the medical and other records
likely to be at issue

15 Consolidation of these cases for pretrial purposes would also promote the ‘Just and
efficient administration of clamms and issues rarsed and avoid potentially mconsistent rulings and
rehef that will affect the course of this litigation from the beginning Indeed, Judge Smith has
already ruled on important questions of law mn Culverson concerning, among other things,
preemption and admusstbility of expert testimony under Frye The nsk of inconsistent rulings in
other cases involving the same questions would lead to incongruous results among plamtiffs and

foster distrust of the legal system

SUBMITTED {9895246 Andy Ho 10M4/2022 11 11 AM
009

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elzabeth Villa 12/26/2022 12 48 PM128992

128997

16 Courts have conststently found pretrial coordination to be appropriate in cases
involving pharmaceuticals The Supreme Court Rules Committee has noted that Rule 384 1s
based on 28 USC § 1407, the analogous federal statute governmg multidistrict litigation See
Ml Sup Ct R 384 at Committee Comments The Federal Judictal Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation (“JPML”) has recognized that multi-forum cases involvmg common questions
regarding the “development, testing manufacturmg and marketing” of pharmaceutical products
are appropriate candidates for pretnal consolidation Jn re Accutane Prods Liab Ling 343 F
Supp 2d 1382, 1383 (7 P ML 2004) (emphasis added), see also eg, Inre Trasylol Prods
Liab Litig 545 F Supp 2d 1357 (J P ML 2008) (consolidating actions regarding the safety
profile of a drug and the adequacy of the drug manufacturer’s warnings), Jn re Vytorin/Zetia
Mktg, Sales Practices & Prods liab Ling , 543 F Supp 2d 1378 (J P ML 2008)
(consohdating actions mvolving common questions about the use and marketing of two
pharmaceutical drugs), In re Paxil Prods Liab Lig ,296F Supp 2¢ 1374 (JP ML 2003)
(consolidating actions in which plamntiffs alleged that defendants knew of the side- effects of a
drug and concealed, misrepresented, or failed to warn of them)

7 Indeed, pursuant to 28 USC § 1407, the Judicial Panel on Muttidistrict
Litigation has already created a Federal multidistnct proceeding in the Umted States District
Court for the Southern District of Florida captioned Jn re Zantac (Ranitidme) Products Labiltty
Litgatton, MDL No 2924 This MDL involves vanous individual and class claims relating to
NDMA mn defendants’ Zantac and ranitidine products

18 In prior Rule 384 proceedings, the Court has sometimes needed to clarrfy that us
orders were intended to have a single judge preside over all affected cases, so that a party could

not defeat the purpose of consoldation by filing a substitution-ofyudge motion See Bemus v

SUBMITTED 19695848 AndyHo 10/14/202211 11 AM
010

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elzabeth Vila 12/28/2022 12 48 PM128992

128997

State Farm Fire & Casualty Co, 919 NE 24349, No 108283 (11) Jan 14, 2010) To avoid any
need for such clarfication here, Plamtiffs request that the Court designate Culverson as the “lead
case” for all cases consolidated for pretnal purposes and assign Judge Smuth to oversee all
consolidated cases

19 Judge Smuth 1s the best choice to preside over pretrial proceedings in the
consolidated cases In selecting a prestding judge, the federal JPML has recognized the benefits
of “entrust[ing] * * * litigation to a jurist who has both a unique understanding of its history and
considerable expertise in the applicable law ” Jn re Epogen & Aranesp Off-Label Mktg & Sales
Practices Ling 545 F Supp 2d 1365, 1367 P ML 2008) Judge Smith has unique expertence
as the presiding judge m what will be the first ranitidine case to go to tal in Uhnots, and she
oversaw the pretrial proceedings relating to Culverson’s co-plaintuff Joseph Bayer, which was
scheduled to go to trial August 22, 2022, before the case was voluntarily dismissed on August
19, 2022 As a result of her role as prestding judge in Cufverson, she has gained particular
knowledge and expertise of the underlying controversy, parties, and legal issues Indeed, no
Judge in Illimots has more experience than Judge Smuth i these cases Further, Judge Smith 1s a
well-respected jurist with substantial experrence i complex htigation and leadership Her pnor
experience both as a judge and in the US Army will promote efficiency and judicial economy in
the pretrial management of the consolidated cases

20 In the alternative, if the Court were to determine that the Circuit of Madison
County ts not an appropriate forum in which to consolidate these cases, Plamtff respectfully
submuts that the Circuit Court of St Clair County ts also an appropriate forum Plaintiffs in
Daugherty et al v Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuncals, Inc , et al ,22-LA-0076 pending in

St Clair Couaty are scheduled to go to trial :n November 2023 Plaintiffs in those cases, and all

SUBMITTED 19895846 AndyHo 10/14/2022 1111 AM
011

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elizabeth Villa 12/28/2022 12 48 PM128992

128997

cases subject to this motion, have cancer resulting from their ingestion of defendants’ products
All have an interest in moving these cases forward as expeditiously as possible That trial 1s
scheduled in Daugherty in St Clair County demonstrates that, like. Madison County, 1t 1s an
appropriate venue to push these cases forward expeditiously

Conclusion

21 For the foregoing reasons, the Court should enter an order (1) transfernng for
consolidated pretrial proceedings (and only for pretrial proceedings) the above-captioned action
and all other pending actions alleging that Zantac and rarutidine-contammg products sold by
defendants caused the plamtiffs to develop cancer, (2) designating the pending case Culverson v
Boehringer Ingelheun Pharmaceuncals Inc et al ,2021L000915 in Madison County as the lead
case for such consolidated pretrial proceedings, and (3) ordermg that all future cases be
transferred to the Circuit Court of Madison County In the alternative, 1f the Court determines
that the Curcurt Court of Madison County 1s not an appropiate venue for consolidation of these
cases, Plaintiff respectfully subrts that the Cireut Court of St Claw County ts an appropriate

alternative

SUBMITTED t9ae5e46 Andy Ho 10/14/2022 11 11 AM
012

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elzabeth Vila 12/28/2022 12 48 PM128992

Dated October 14, 2022

HOLLAND LAW FIRM, LLC
ERIC D HOLLAND (#6207110)
R_ SETH CROMPTON (#6288095)
GREG JONES (#6325696)

211 North Broadway, Suite 2625

St Louts, MO 63102

(314) 241-8111 Telephone

(314) 241-5554 Facsimile
eholland@hollandtnallawyers com
scrompton@hollandtrallawyers com
gjones@hollandtnallawyers com

HOLLAND LAW FIRM, LLC
ANNE CALLIS (#6203933)
ERIKA STASSI (#6327641)
1324 Niedringhaus Avenue
Granite City, [lois 62040
(618) 452-1323 Telephone
(618) 452-8024 Facsimile
acallis@hollandtnallawyers com
estassi@hollandtriallawyers com

128997

Respectfully submitted,

KELLER POSTMAN LLC

Al Ashley C Keller

ASHLEY KELLER (#6300171)
JASON A ZWEIG (#6320010)
150 N Riverside Plaza, Suite 4100
Chicago, Dinots 60606

(312) 741-5220 Telephone
ack@kellerpostman com
Jaz@kellerpostman com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

SUBMITTED 19895846 AncyHo 10/14/2022 4411 AM

013

SUBMITTED 20821653 Enhzabeth Villa 12/28/2022 12 48 PM128992

128997

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Thereby certrfy that on October 14, 2022, a copy of the foregoing documents, having

been electronically submitted to the Clerk of the Supreme Court, was also matled to the

followmg persons at the addresses shown via first class mail

Ins Y Martinez

Cook County Circurt Clerk

50 W Washington, Suite 1001
Chicago, IL 60602-1305

Thomas K McRae

Madison County Circuit Clerk
155.N Man Street, Suite 120
Edwardsville, IL 62025

Marte Zaiz

St Clair County Crremt Clerk
#10 Public Square

Belleville, IL 62220

SUBMITTED 19895845 AndyHo 10/14/2022 1111AM

014

SUBMITTED - 20821653 Elzabeth Villa 12/28/2022 1248 PM128992

Additionally, the foregomg documents were also sent to the followmg via email to the

addresses indicated below

128997

Defendant

Counsel

IVAX Pharmaceuticals, LLC, Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc, Watson
Laboratones, Inc , and Actavis Mid
Atlantic LLC

Jonathan T Barton, #6257357
Ashley E Benoist, #6322413
STANTON | BARTON LLC
8000 Maryland Avenue, Surte 450
St Lous, MO.63105
314-455-6500

314-455-6524 (Fax)
Jbarton@stantonbarton com
abenoist@stantonbarton com

Gregory E Ostfeld # 6257163
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
77 West Wacker Drive Suite 3100
Chicago, IL 60601

312-476-5056

312-899 0420 (Fax)
ostfeldg@gtlaw com

Lon G Cohen (pro hac vice)

Sara K Thompson (pro hac vice)
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
3333 Piedmont Rd NE, Suite 2500
Atlanta, GA 30305

678-553-2100

CohenL@etlaw com
ThompsonS@gtlaw com

Ajanta Pharma Ltd, Ajanta Pharma
USA Inc

Neal Seth

WILEY REIN LLP
2050 M Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
202-719-7000
nseth@wiley law

SUBMITTED 19895846 AndyHo 40/14/2022 11 11 AM

SUBMITTED 20621653 Elizabeth Villa 12/28/2022 1248 PM

13

015128992

128997

Albertson’s Compames, Inc , Duane
Reade Inc , Giant Eagle, Inc , Rite Aid
Corporation, Safeway, Inc , Yon
Compames Inc

Sarah E Johnston

BARNES & THORNBURG LLP
2029 Century Park East, Suite 300
Los Angeles, Califorma 90067
Telephone = (310) 284-3880
Facsimile (310) 284-3894
sarah johnston@btlaw com

EnnM Pauley

Sarah Jin

Amy R Michelau

BARNES & THORNBURG, LLP
One North Wacker Dr, Ste 4400
Chicago, IL 60606 (312)214-4598
epauley@btlaw com

gun@btlaw com
amichelau@btlaw com

William J Burton

Barnes & Thomburg LLP

1000 N West Street, Suite 1500
Wilmington, DE 19801
302-300-345]

Wilham burton@btlaw com

Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC

Jonathon Drews

ULMER & BERNE LLP

500 W Madison Street, Suite 3600
Chicago, Ulinois 60661

Tel 312-658-6500

Fax 312-658 6501
Jdrews@ulmer com

ANI Pharmaceuticals Inc

Elyse D Echtman

STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP
1114 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036
212-378-7551
eechtman@steptoe com

Apotex Corp

Ann Querns

BLANK ROME LLP
130N 18th Street

One Logan Square
Philadelphia, PA 19103
215/569-5674
aquerns@blankrome com

SUBMITTED 19895845 AndyHo 10/14/202211 11AM

14

016

SUBMITTED 20821653 Elzabeth Vila 12/28/2022 12 48 PM128992

128997

Appco Pharma LLC

Jordan Scott Cohen

WICKER SMITH O'HARA MCCOY & FORD
515 ELas Olas Blvd

Surte 1400 Suntrust Center

Fort Lauderdale,FL 33301

945-847-4834, 954-760-9353 (fax)
Jcohen@wickersmith com,

Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc , and
Aurohealth LLC

Willam D Shultz, Jr

Candice Kusmer

MANNING GROSS & MASSENBURG,LLP
1405 N Green Mount Road, Sinte 400
O'Fallon, IL 62269

Telephone (618).277-5500

Facsimile (618) 277-6334
wshultz@mgmlaw com

ckusmer@mgmlaw com

Dr Reddy’s Laboratories, Inc and Dr
Reddy's Laboratories Louisiana, LLC

Witham D Shultz, Jr #06207607

Candice C Kusmer #06284948

MANNING GROSS + MASSENBURG LLP
1405 Green Mount Road, Suite 400
O'Fallon, IL 62269

Telephone (618) 277-5500

Facsumule (618) 277-6334
wshultz@mgmlaw com

ckusmer@mgmlaw com

John R Ipsaro (pro hac vice)
Megan B Gramke (pro hac vice)
ULMER & BERNE LLP

312 Walnut Street, Suite 1400
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Telephone (513) 698-5000
Facsumile (513) 698-5001
Jipsaro@ulmer com
megramke@ulmer com

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd

Alex Cameron Walker

MODRALL