From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Leroy v. Medtronic, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION
Jul 29, 2015
Case No: 3:14cv284/MCR/CJK (N.D. Fla. Jul. 29, 2015)

Opinion

Case No: 3:14cv284/MCR/CJK

07-29-2015

WALTER LEROY, Plaintiff, v. MEDTRONIC, INC., Defendant.


ORDER

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation dated February 12, 2015. (Doc. 22). The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of all timely filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any timely filed objections thereto, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation (doc. 22) is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.

2. Defendant's Amended Request to Take Judicial Notice (doc. 18) is GRANTED.

3. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (doc. 12) is GRANTED to the extent plaintiff's complaint (doc. 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to plaintiff's filing an amended complaint (pleading a sufficiently specific parallel claim), if he can do so in good faith consistent with his Rule 11 obligations, within fourteen (14) days from the date this order.

4. If an amended complaint is not filed within the time provided, the clerk, without further notice to plaintiff, shall enter a final judgment dismissing this case with prejudice.

DONE AND ORDERED on this 29th day of July, 2015.

/s/ _________

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Leroy v. Medtronic, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION
Jul 29, 2015
Case No: 3:14cv284/MCR/CJK (N.D. Fla. Jul. 29, 2015)
Case details for

Leroy v. Medtronic, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:WALTER LEROY, Plaintiff, v. MEDTRONIC, INC., Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION

Date published: Jul 29, 2015

Citations

Case No: 3:14cv284/MCR/CJK (N.D. Fla. Jul. 29, 2015)

Citing Cases

Pearsall v. Medtronics, Inc.

Subsequent courts noted the “narrow gap” of permissible state claims following Riegel. A plaintiff's claim…

Mink v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.

Claims sounding in private enforcement are impliedly preempted. See, e.g.,Leroy v. Medtronic, Inc., No.…