Susan Barfield (0:05):
Hello everyone. Welcome to another episode of Tort Talk Thursday here with Joe Fantini of Rosen Injury Lawyers. Joe, so thankful for you to take time out of your day to spend with me and provide some updates, insights into the latest litigations.
Joe Fantini (0:19):
Thanks for having me, Susan. Always love to get together and talk the latest developments and all things mass torts.
Susan Barfield (0:25):
Yeah, well, let’s dive right in. Why don’t we start off, if you don’t mind, giving us a little bit of an update on Suboxone. I know there’s the motion to dismiss in the bellwether. Why don’t you talk a little bit about that.
Joe Fantini (0:35):
Yeah, so we got a recent good ruling in the Suboxone MDL. The judge ruled in our favor and about 80% of the defendant’s motion to dismiss. So that’s good. It means the case is going to go forward. Basically, we have about 700 cases currently filed in the MDL, maybe another 10,000 or so on a tolling agreement. The parties right now are working to come up with a bellwether process. We’re to submit that to the judge in the beginning of February and then at the case management conference in the middle of February the likelihood is that the judge is going to enter an order establishing that process. So really that case is going to start picking up here in a couple of months and get these cases to trial, which is always really important for us, as you know.
Susan Barfield (1:16):
Yeah, absolutely. That is exciting. OK, the next litigation I’m interested to hear your feedback on is Paraquat.
Joe Fantini (1:23):
Paraquat is another really important litigation that we’ve been following for a number of years. We have a little under 6,000 cases pending in the MDL. What we’ve seen there recently is that a couple of cases are getting dismissed for failure to submit fact sheets. We usually see that when there’s a potential settlement on the horizon. So, when we couple that with the Philadelphia litigation where we have a little under 1,000 cases pending, we just submitted the motions to exclude the experts and also the motions for summary judgment. The responses are due in the beginning of February. Then we’ll have an opportunity to submit the replies, oral arguments in March, and then the Cases are scheduled to go to trial in April, so it looks like we’re going to either have a trial or have a settlement in about the next 90 days or so. We’ll keep you updated on that important case.
Susan Barfield (2:12):
Awesome. Next litigation would be the weight loss litigation, and I know that there is an approaching Daubert hearing. I wanted to understand a little bit more about that.
Joe Fantini (2:21):
Yes, so we have the Daubert hearing scheduled in May here. The parties right now are completing the expert discovery. We’re going to see the defendant’s motion to exclude our experts, we’ll have some motion to exclude some of the defendant’s experts. Each party will have the opportunity to submit a response, and then ultimately we’ll get in front of the judge for the oral arguments. Usually we see a ruling from a judge on the Dauberts within 30 to 60 days, so before the end of the summer, we’ll know which experts are able to proceed and then also more importantly, which injuries are going to be viable in this litigation. So really excited to see that litigation moving forward. We have about 1,500 cases; we’re predicting over 10,000 at the end of the day.
Susan Barfield (3:03):
And lastly, if you could share some updates on Depo-Provera.
Joe Fantini (3:08):
Depo-Provera is the new kid on the block. We saw at the end of 2024, a study coming out linking Depo-Provera, which has been used for decades to these brain tumors. There was a motion to consolidate in front of the JPML, and then here at the end of January, the date’s finally here. We’re going to get an argument to see that. Importantly, the defendants agree that the case, it should be consolidated, so we’ll certainly have an MDL form. The issue is whether the cases are going to go to California, where the defendants want, or some other jurisdiction like California where the plaintiffs want. It looks like it’s headed to California. We won’t know for certain, but we’ll have a ruling the first week of February, and me and you will discuss that and the impact on the litigation going forward.
Susan Barfield (3:51):
Awesome. Well, Joe, as always, thank you so much for taking time to visit with us and share the latest on these litigations.
Joe Fantini (3:57):
Thanks for having me, Susan.
Susan Barfield (3:59):
If you would like to hear the industry’s latest news and updates, please make sure to subscribe to the Caseworks channel. Simply click the button below and make sure you have notifications so that you are the first to hear of the latest updates and insights. Until next week.