STIPULATION AND ORDER TO STAY ACTION PENDING A DECISION FROM THE UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., District Judge.

Plaintiffs Penelope Costamagna and Gary Costamagna ("Plaintiffs") and Defendant AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP ("AstraZeneca"), by and through their respective counsel, jointly stipulate and request this Court to stay this action pending a determination by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ("JPML") in the In re Proton-Pump Inhibitor Products Liability Litigation as to whether to transfer and consolidate complaints filed against AstraZeneca and others into a multidistrict proceeding.

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed their Complaint on February 23, 2017 (ECF No. 1);

WHEREAS, service was completed on Defendants as of April 10, 2017 (ECF No. 6);

WHEREAS, on May 1, 2017, AstraZeneca filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint (ECF Nos. 9 and 10), which was set for hearing on June 15, 2017, and reset by the Court for June 29, 2017;

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 23) on May 22, 2017;

WHEREAS, AstraZeneca answered the First Amended Complaint on June 5, 2017 (ECF No. 27);

WHEREAS, on May 31, 2017, several plaintiffs filed before the JPML a Motion for Transfer of Actions to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey Pursuant to 28 U.S. C. § 1407 and JPML Rule 7.2 for Coordinated and Consolidated Pretrial Proceedings ("Motion for Transfer"), attached hereto as Exhibit A;

WHEREAS, through that Motion for Transfer, those plaintiffs seek transfer and centralization in the District of New Jersey of at least 172 product liability cases, including the instant matter, that are currently pending in multiple district courts nationwide alleging various renal injuries as a result of use of proton-pump inhibitors ("PPIs");

WHEREAS, it is anticipated the JPML will consider the Motion for Transfer at its next scheduled hearing on July 27, 2017 in Los Angeles, California, and that a decision on the Motion will be rendered in August 2017;

WHEREAS, the parties jointly submit that good cause exists for a short stay of this case and the Rule 16 and 26 deadlines — including the meet and confer, preparation of a discovery plan, and exchange of initial disclosures — until the JPML renders its decision, given the uncertainty as to whether this matter will remain before this Court;

WHEREAS, the parties jointly submit that good cause exists to vacate the schedule set by the Court upon filing of the Complaint in the Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order (ECF No. 3), which would become final without further order of the Court unless objections are filed within sixty (60) days of service on all defendants;

NOW, THEREFORE, undersigned counsel for the parties, having met and conferred, stipulate and request the Court to order as follows:

1. The action is stayed pending the JPML decision on the Motion for Transfer;

2. The Rule 16 and Rule 26 deadlines are stayed, and the deadlines set forth in the Court's Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order are vacated;

3. The Court will set a status conference in September 2017 to discuss case management and set the case deadlines, in advance of which the parties shall meet and confer and file a Joint Proposed Scheduling Order, should this matter remain in this Court.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED.

ORDER

Having reviewed the parties' stipulation, and good cause appearing, the Court's Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order (ECF No. 3) is hereby vacated and this action is stayed in all respects pending the JPML decision on the pending Motion to Transfer. This matter is set for a status conference on September 21, 2017 at 2:00 p.m. That conference will establish a schedule for adjudicating the case depending on the status of the matter at that time. The parties are ordered to file a Joint Proposed Scheduling Order within seven (7) calendars days preceding the status conference.

IT IS SO ORDERED.