IN RE AREDIA AND ZOMETA PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION, 3:06-MD-1760. (2013)
Court: District Court, M.D. Tennessee
Number: infdco20130621d03
Visitors: 14
Filed: Jun. 20, 2013
Latest Update: Jun. 20, 2013
Summary: ORDER TODD J. CAMPBELL, District Judge. Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 6707) of the Magistrate Judge, Plaintiffs' Objections thereto (Docket Nos. 6576 and 6737), and Defendant's Responses to the Objections (Docket Nos. 6605 and 6740). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) and Local Rule 72.03(b)(3), the Court has reviewed de novo the Report and Recommendation, the Objections, the Responses and the file. The Objections of the Plainti
Summary: ORDER TODD J. CAMPBELL, District Judge. Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 6707) of the Magistrate Judge, Plaintiffs' Objections thereto (Docket Nos. 6576 and 6737), and Defendant's Responses to the Objections (Docket Nos. 6605 and 6740). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) and Local Rule 72.03(b)(3), the Court has reviewed de novo the Report and Recommendation, the Objections, the Responses and the file. The Objections of the Plaintif..
More
ORDER
TODD J. CAMPBELL, District Judge.
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 6707) of the Magistrate Judge, Plaintiffs' Objections thereto (Docket Nos. 6576 and 6737), and Defendant's Responses to the Objections (Docket Nos. 6605 and 6740).
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) and Local Rule 72.03(b)(3), the Court has reviewed de novo the Report and Recommendation, the Objections, the Responses and the file. The Objections of the Plaintiffs are well-taken, and the Report and Recommendation is rejected.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs' Motion to Substitute (Docket No. 6332), previously denied by the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 6523), is GRANTED, and Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 6314) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
