Louisiana Health Service & Indemnity Company v. Celgene Corporation
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:23-cv-07871
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Louisiana Health Service v. Celgene, Judge Ramos scheduled a conference on purchasers’ request for jurisdictional discovery concerning Dr. Zeldis.
The purchasers, Dr. Jerome Zeldis, and the parties involved in the action against Celgene and the other defendants were affected. The order set deadlines and a conference but did not decide the discovery request or Zeldis’s personal-jurisdiction motion.
What happened
In Louisiana Health Service & Indemnity Co. v. Celgene Corp., the purchasers asked to investigate whether the court could exercise authority over Dr. Jerome Zeldis. They pointed to his alleged New York connections while working for Celgene, including teaching at Cornell and owning New York apartments.
Zeldis had moved to dismiss the claims against him for lack of personal jurisdiction, arguing that he did not recall doing meaningful work in New York. The purchasers argued that his New York contacts could show he conducted business there for Celgene and requested limited document production, written questions, and possible subpoenas to telephone carriers.
The court did not decide whether to allow the requested discovery or whether it had jurisdiction over Zeldis. Judge Ramos scheduled a telephone pre-motion conference for May 31, 2024, and directed Zeldis to respond by May 22, 2024.
The detailed version
- Louisiana Health Service & Indemnity Company v. Celgene Corporation · No. 1:23-cv-07871
- Edgardo Ramos
- May 9, 2024
Background
The purchasers filed a letter asking for a pre-motion conference and, alternatively, permission to serve limited jurisdictional discovery on Dr. Jerome Zeldis. Zeldis had moved to dismiss the claims against him in part for lack of personal jurisdiction under New York’s long-arm statute, section 302(a)(1). The letter states that Zeldis argued he did not recall performing meaningful work in New York.
Parties’ Positions
The purchasers argued that there was a genuine dispute about jurisdictional facts. They pointed to Zeldis’s work as a senior executive and Chief Medical Officer of Celgene from 1997 to 2016, his teaching at Cornell from 1995 to 2003, and his purchase and continued ownership of New York apartments. They argued that these facts could support an inference that he transacted business for Celgene in New York, including by making calls, attending meetings, or overseeing clinical trials there.
The proposed discovery consisted of four document requests and five interrogatories. The purchasers said they had narrowed the requests, sought information not publicly available, and attempted to resolve the dispute with Zeldis’s counsel. They also requested permission to serve subpoenas on nonparty telephone carriers identified through the discovery.
Court’s Action
The court did not rule on whether jurisdictional discovery would be permitted, whether personal jurisdiction exists over Zeldis, or whether Zeldis’s motion to dismiss should be granted. Instead, Judge Edgardo Ramos ordered a telephone pre-motion conference for May 31, 2024, at 11:00 a.m., and directed Zeldis to respond to the letter by May 22, 2024.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.