Robinson v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 18-1743. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20190425d74
Visitors: 14
Filed: Apr. 23, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 23, 2019
Summary: ORDER MITCHELL S. GOLDBERG , District Judge . AND NOW, this 22nd day of April, 2019, upon consideration of the Motion by Defendants R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Philip Morris USA, Inc. to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Doc. No. 28) and the separate Motion by Defendant Philip Morris USA to Dismiss for Lack of Product Use (Doc. No. 27), it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's claims as time barred is DENIED ; 2. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss P
Summary: ORDER MITCHELL S. GOLDBERG , District Judge . AND NOW, this 22nd day of April, 2019, upon consideration of the Motion by Defendants R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Philip Morris USA, Inc. to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Doc. No. 28) and the separate Motion by Defendant Philip Morris USA to Dismiss for Lack of Product Use (Doc. No. 27), it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's claims as time barred is DENIED ; 2. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Pl..
More
ORDER
MITCHELL S. GOLDBERG, District Judge.
AND NOW, this 22nd day of April, 2019, upon consideration of the Motion by Defendants R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Philip Morris USA, Inc. to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Doc. No. 28) and the separate Motion by Defendant Philip Morris USA to Dismiss for Lack of Product Use (Doc. No. 27), it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's claims as time barred is DENIED;
2. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's product liability claim in Count I of the Amended Complaint is DENIED to the extent that Plaintiff alleges defects in Defendants' warnings prior to 1969 and GRANTED in all other respects;
3. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's negligence claim in Count II of the Amended Complaint is DENIED;
4. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's "youth marketing" claim in Count III of the Amended Complaint is GRANTED;
5. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint for insufficient process is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff shall have forty-five (45) days from the date of this Order in which to effectuate proper service on the Defendants. Failure to do so may result in dismissal of his Amended Complaint. Defendants shall have twenty-one (21) days after service in which to file Answers.
6. Defendant Philip Morris's separate Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Product Use is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
