From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Miller v. Zimmer Biomet Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE
Dec 20, 2017
Case No. 2:17-cv-265-JDL (D. Me. Dec. 20, 2017)

Opinion

Case No. 2:17-cv-265-JDL

12-20-2017

JANICE E. MILLER, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ZIMMER BIOMET INC. et al. Defendants.


ORDER ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The United States Magistrate Judge filed his Recommended Decision (ECF No. 29) with the court on November 30, 2017, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). The time within which to file objections expired December 14, 2017, and no objections have been filed. The Magistrate Judge notified the parties that failure to object would waive their right to de novo review and appeal.

It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ACCEPTED. The Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 16) is GRANTED as to Claim Seven (negligence) and the Motion is DENIED in all other respects.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 20, 2017

/s/ Jon D. Levy

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Miller v. Zimmer Biomet Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE
Dec 20, 2017
Case No. 2:17-cv-265-JDL (D. Me. Dec. 20, 2017)
Case details for

Miller v. Zimmer Biomet Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JANICE E. MILLER, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ZIMMER BIOMET INC. et al…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE

Date published: Dec 20, 2017

Citations

Case No. 2:17-cv-265-JDL (D. Me. Dec. 20, 2017)

Citing Cases

Milanesi v. C.R. Bard (In re Davol, Inc.)

Plaintiff has alleged that “Defendants not only sold a defective product, but that Defendants knew the…