Knoles v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.

Background

Marlessa Knoles sued Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. and Teva Branded Pharmaceuticals Products R&D, Inc., along with FEI Women’s Health LLC, Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, LLC, and Duramed Pharmaceuticals. She alleged that she suffered injuries after a Paragard intrauterine device was implanted and later broke during attempted removal. The second amended complaint asserted state-law claims for strict products liability, failure to warn, defective design, and negligence.

The court had previously granted the Teva defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings with permission to amend, but limited the amendment to claims against those defendants. The court also allowed Knoles to add the appropriate Paragard entity, while directing her not to add other parties or claims without express permission. Knoles’s second amended complaint instead added three different defendants: FEI Women’s Health LLC, Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, LLC, and Duramed Pharmaceuticals.

Teva Defendants’ Jurisdiction Motion

The Teva defendants moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2), which permits dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court found that the motion was timely even though the defendants filed it at the same time as their answers.

Personal jurisdiction is a court’s authority to exercise power over a defendant. The court considered both general jurisdiction and specific jurisdiction. General jurisdiction requires contacts so extensive that a corporation is essentially at home in the state. Specific jurisdiction requires a connection between the defendant’s forum-related conduct and the plaintiff’s claims.

The court held that Knoles had not made the required preliminary showing of either type of jurisdiction. She did not allege or provide evidence showing that either Teva defendant was essentially at home in California. The court also found that she did not allege facts showing that either defendant sold products in California or otherwise purposefully conducted business there in a way that invoked California’s legal protections.

The court separately held that Knoles had not shown that her claims arose from the Teva defendants’ California-related conduct. The court relied on evidence that Teva Branded never manufactured or sold Paragard devices, Teva USA never manufactured them, and Teva USA did not sell them before December 31, 2004. Because Knoles’s device was inserted on December 7, 2004, the court concluded that neither Teva defendant could have sold the device inserted into her. The court also found that Knoles’s allegations that the Teva defendants assumed the duties and liabilities of earlier manufacturers were conclusory and unsupported.

The court therefore granted the Teva defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction without leave to amend. The court did not reach the merits of Knoles’s products-liability or negligence claims against those defendants.

Motion to Strike

The Teva defendants also moved to strike the second amended complaint because Knoles allegedly filed it in violation of the court’s earlier order limiting amendment. Because the court granted dismissal of the claims against the Teva defendants without leave to amend, it terminated the motion to strike as moot.

Remaining Defendants and Order to Show Cause

The court noted that the three remaining defendants were added without the permission required by the earlier order. It also noted that Knoles had not filed proofs showing that those defendants were served within the period required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). That rule allows a court, after notice, to dismiss an unserved defendant or order service by a specified deadline.

The court ordered Knoles to show cause in writing why the second amended complaint should not be dismissed as to FEI Women’s Health LLC, Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, LLC, and Duramed Pharmaceuticals. The court set October 31, 2019, as the response deadline. It did not, in this order, dismiss the claims against those three defendants.