Filed: May 30, 2013
Latest Update: May 30, 2013
Summary: ORDER CLAY D. LAND, District Judge. The Court has conducted an extensive review of Plaintiff's deposition designations and Mentor's objections to those designations. Based on this review, the Court is inclined to sustain Mentor's objections to the following testimony, some of which is post-implant evidence, unless Plaintiff can explain how this evidence ties in to Mentor's pre-implant (December 29, 2004) knowledge or is otherwise relevant and admissible. As to other rulings sustaining objectio
Summary: ORDER CLAY D. LAND, District Judge. The Court has conducted an extensive review of Plaintiff's deposition designations and Mentor's objections to those designations. Based on this review, the Court is inclined to sustain Mentor's objections to the following testimony, some of which is post-implant evidence, unless Plaintiff can explain how this evidence ties in to Mentor's pre-implant (December 29, 2004) knowledge or is otherwise relevant and admissible. As to other rulings sustaining objection..
More
ORDER
CLAY D. LAND, District Judge.
The Court has conducted an extensive review of Plaintiff's deposition designations and Mentor's objections to those designations. Based on this review, the Court is inclined to sustain Mentor's objections to the following testimony, some of which is post-implant evidence, unless Plaintiff can explain how this evidence ties in to Mentor's pre-implant (December 29, 2004) knowledge or is otherwise relevant and admissible. As to other rulings sustaining objections, counsel may be able to illuminate the Court as to why that evidence is admissible by tying it in to some aspect of the case which the Court did not consider when reviewing the depositions.
Kathleen Beauchamp Deposition Testimony Dated March 12, 2010
166:08-166:16
167:09-168:24
204:11-205:06
205:21-206:15
207:05-207:24
219:17-220:06
228:03-228:12
228:24-230:05
231:13-231:21
232:13-232:14
234:08-236:13
243:12-243:19
244:07-245:15
247:02-247:10
301:10-301:24
302:19-303:10
303:19-304:13
315:15-317:16
317:21-319:10
319:19-320:05
324:21-325:10
325:19-327:17
329:03-330:23
Kathleen Kobashi, MD Deposition Testimony Dated January 31, 2012
18:22-19:06
99:01-100:09
163:10-164:20
Adel Michael Deposition Testimony Dated April 16, 2009
39:08-39:16
Catherine Ortuno Deposition Testimony Dated October 19, 2009
29:01-29:14
54:24-55:13
230:11-233:25
260:21-266:03
Chris Sellwood Deposition Testimony Dated September 25, 2012
43:13-45:03
49:06-49:25
63:05-63:11
63:21-65:20
66:18-70:02
71:06-71:12
71:20-72:07
104:23-108:06
108:20-110:04
110:10-111:04
111:15-114:06
115:22-130:25
161:24-167:01
227:09-229:22
Ray Tantillo Deposition Testimony Dated September 30, 2009
56:18-59:12
64:06-65:08
110:06-110:24
160:02-164:02
215:10-15
224:02-224:14
237:23-240:07
242:15-243:13
245:05-245:19
255:21-256:13
256:14-18
257:08-261:05
The Court also alerts counsel for Plaintiffs that they should be prepared to address hearsay objections in the presentation of evidence of substantially similar incidents that is introduced for purposes of causation or something other than notice. The Court presently cannot conceive of how "complaints" standing alone would be able to overcome a hearsay objection if the purpose of the evidence is to establish causation or some issue other than notice.
Counsel will have an opportunity to address these issues at the conference on Friday.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
