DOCSLIB.ORG

In the Circuit Court of Putnam County, West Virginia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
In the Circuit Court of Putnam County, West Virginia IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PUTNAM COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA ZINA G. BIBB, VICKI BAILEY, HERBERT W. DIXON, NORMA J. DIXON, DONALD R. RHODES, WANDA M. RHODES, BETTY TYSON, and CHARLES S. TYSON Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 04-C-465 Derek C. Swope, Judge MONSANTO COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, with its principal place of business in the State of Missouri; PHARMACIA CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, with its principal place of business in the State of Missouri; Defendants. ORDER APPROVING FINAL SETTLEMENT The issue before the Court is the final approval of the proposed settlements of the above- styled action; specifically, the Medical Monitoring Class Settlement Agreement and the Property Class Settlement Agreement. These two settlements cover the Medical Monitoring Class and the previously decertified Property Class in this matter.1 The proponents of the proposed settlement are Zina G. Bibb, et al., by Class Counsel, W. Stuart Calwell, Jr., Esq., David Carriger, Esq., John Skaggs, Esq., Alex McLaughlin, Esq., and 1 The global settlement also covers approximately 190 personal injury cases. 1 Benjamin D. Adams, Esq. of the Calwell Practice, PLLC, and James F. Humphreys, Esq., of James F. Humphreys & Associates, LC; and Monsanto Company, et al., by counsel, Charles M. Love, III, Esq., Leonard Knee, Esq., Fazal Shere, Esq., Michael Pleska, Esq., and Robert L. Hogan, Esq., of Bowles, Rice, McDavid, Graff & Love, PLLC, and Thomas Goutman, Esq., of White and Williams, LLP. There are also objectors to the proposed settlement. Specifically, there are three categories of objectors; two are represented by counsel and the other category is a number of individual pro se objectors. First, are former named Plaintiffs Virdie Allen, Charles and Aileen Agee, and Hilman and Erma Raynes, by counsel, Thomas F. Urban, II, Esq.,2 of Urban & Falk, PLLC. Second, are Class Members Jane Murdock, Patricia Holstein, and Nel Cox, by counsel, Ruth McQuade, Esq., of the Law Offices of Ruth McQuade. Finally, there are a number of individual pro se objectors: Karen Kirkendoll; G. Jacob; Linda Cowley; Clifford Cawley; Fran Kesler; James W. Morrison; Gordon Schronce; Barbara G. Yarbrough; Randolph W. Yarbrough; Michelle Cowley; Connie Burke Smith; James A. Carnes; Fred Murrock; Margaret Castle; Minnie Case; Rose C. Brant; Dennis W. Withrow; Robert L. Smith; Sharon Chaney; William L. Roberts; Francoise Nienke; Connie A. Stone; Karen Sales Childers; Jerry Jeffries; Karen E. Lamb; Michael L. Kelly; Robert A. McClanahan; Wanda L. Jeffries Steorts; Kevin McDaniel; Lisa Williams; Auvil Whited; Larry O. Frazier; Robin L. Mallett; Kelsea L. Mallett; Pat Higginbotham; Patricia Lovejoy; Richard Sanders; Robert Smith; Bernice I. Clark; Gloria Hughes; Mary L. Barnette; Ellen L. Mann; and Helena Johnson. 2 Mr. Urban alleges that he represents more than 1600 class members in his Memorandum Identifying the Urban & Falk Objectors filed on June 11, 2012. (dkt. no. 3135). 2 The Court preliminarily approved the proposed settlements on February 24, 2012; specifically, the Court found that the terms of the proposed settlement are preliminarily “within the range of reasonableness.” Order Preliminarily Approving Class Settlements February 24, 2012 (dkt. no. 3028). After notice of the proposed settlement was distributed to the Class, the Court held a fairness hearing on June 18, 2012. Hr’g Tr. June 18, 2012. (dkt. no. 3180). This case having been fully briefed3 and argued is ready for adjudication. The Court’s review of the Medical Monitoring Class Settlement Agreement and the Property Class Settlement Agreement is made pursuant to Rule 23(e) of the West Virginia Rules of Civil Procedure. After a thorough review of the case, including the file – which has over 3200 lines – and all legal precedent, the Court FINDS and ORDERS as follows:4 Table of Contents I. Background .............................................................................................................................................. 10 A. History of Monsanto and Pharmacia .................................................................................................. 10 B. History of Nitro .................................................................................................................................. 10 C. Monsanto & Nitro ............................................................................................................................... 11 D. 2,3,7,8-TCDD ..................................................................................................................................... 14 E. Waste Disposal Practices at Monsanto’s Nitro Plant .......................................................................... 16 F. 2,4,5-T, The Vietnam War, & Monsanto’s Nitro Plant ....................................................................... 18 G. History of Litigation Concerning Monsanto’s Nitro Plant ................................................................. 20 1. Conner & Amos, Inc. v. Monsanto Chemical Comp. (1960’s) ....................................................... 20 2. James R. Boggess v. Monsanto Company. (1980’s) ....................................................................... 22 3. Carter v. Monsanto Company, et. al. (2000’s)................................................................................. 23 II. History of Bibb et. al. v. Monsanto et. al. Case ...................................................................................... 25 A. The Class Action Complaint .............................................................................................................. 26 B. The First Removal and Remand ......................................................................................................... 28 C. Bankruptcy.......................................................................................................................................... 29 D. The Beginning of Class Certification ................................................................................................. 29 E. Appointment of Lead Counsel ............................................................................................................ 30 F. Motion for Class Certification ............................................................................................................ 31 G. Appeals and Challenges to the Class Certification Order .................................................................. 33 H. Pretrial Publicity & the Gag Order ..................................................................................................... 34 3 There are a number of briefs filed both in support of and opposing the proposed settlement. For brevity’s sake, the Court will not list them in this section of this Order. 4 The Court notes that there are accompanying orders to this order which deal with 1) the issues of attorneys’ fees, attorneys’ liens, and incentive payments, and 2)whether the notice requirements have been satisfied. Consequently, the Court will not deal with these issues in this order. 3 I. The Second Removal and Remand ...................................................................................................... 37 J. Amendment to Medical Monitoring Class Definition ......................................................................... 38 K. First Case Management Order ............................................................................................................ 40 L. Notice of Class Certification ............................................................................................................... 41 M. First Enforcement of the Gag Order .................................................................................................. 44 N. Individual Blood Evidence ................................................................................................................. 45 O. First, Second, and Third Revised Case Management Order ............................................................... 48 P. Hearings on Motions ........................................................................................................................... 49 Q. Assignment of a New Judge and Fourth Revised Case Management Order ...................................... 53 R. Jury Pool ............................................................................................................................................. 54 S. Hearings .............................................................................................................................................. 55 T. First and Second Mediation ................................................................................................................ 55 U. Second Enforcement and Further Strengthening the Gag Order ........................................................ 56 V. Motions & Issues Surrounding the Decertification – Notice, Statute of Limitations, Motion for Recertification, Appeal, Collateral Estoppel, and the December 9, 2011, Hearing ................................ 57 W. Jury Selection and the Proposed Settlement ...................................................................................... 63 X. Notice of Attorney’s Lien Against Mr. Urban ................................................................................... 65 Y. Discovery and Relaxing of the Gag Order ......................................................................................... 65 Z. Transfer of Personal Injury
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Butvar Properties and Uses
    Pub. No. 2008084E (Supersedes 2008084D) Butvar ® POLYVINYL BUTYRAL RESIN PROPERTIES & USES Coatings Performance Materials by CONTENTS Introduction 1 Properties 2 Chemistry 2 Properties Tables 3 Product Types 6 Butvar:The Right Resin Solutions 6 Compatibility 13 Insolubizing Reactions 15 Reaction With Phenolics 15 Reaction With Epoxies 15 Reaction With Dialdhehydes 16 Reaction With Isocyanates 16 Reaction With Melamines 16 Applications 17 Wire Enamels 17 Surface Coatings 17 Wash Primers 17 Military Specification Wash Primers 17 Non-specification Wash Primers: B-1030 With Butvar 18 Single Package Wash Primer: B-1011 With Butvar 18 Chromate-free Wash Primers With Butvar 19 Metal Coatings 20 Wood Finishes 21 Protective Wash Coats and Sealers 21 Knot Sealers 21 Adhesives 22 Structural Adhesives 22 Phenolic Resins 22 Epoxies and Other Thermosetting Resins 22 High-strength Bonding Procedure 23 Performance Characteristics 23 Adhesive Strengths 23 Hot Melt Adhesives 24 Textile Coatings 24 Advantages as Textile Coating 24 Ceramic Binder Applications 25 Tape Casting 26 Thick Films 26 Toners and Printing Inks 27 Storage and Handling 28 Storage 28 Toxicity and FDA Status 28 Quality Control 28 Material Sources Inside Back Cover Worldwide Sales Offices Back Cover Enfocus Software - Customer Support INTRODUCTION olyvinyl butyral resins are employed in a wide USES array of industrial and commercial applications. Some of the applications in which Butvar is a vital PThese unique resins offer impressive performance, ingredient include: as well as outstanding versatility. Ceramic binders Butvar® polyvinyl butyral resins have a combination of Inks/dry toners properties that make them a key ingredient in a variety Wood coatings of successful formulations.
    [Show full text]
  • Universidad Militar Nueva Granada
    UNIVERSIDAD MILITAR NUEVA GRANADA FACULTAD DE RELACIONES INTERNACIONALES ESTRATEGIA Y SEGURIDAD EL ROL DE LA SOCIEDAD CIVIL EN LAS RELACIONES DE PODER CON MONSANTO COMPANY Y CON EL ESTADO MARTHA PATRICIA BUITRAGO PERDOMO Tesis presentada como requisito para optar al título de: Magister en Relaciones y Negocios Internacionales Director HENRY CANCELADO FRANCO Magister en Análisis de Problemas Contemporáneos, Universidad Externado Politólogo, Universidad Nacional BOGOTÁ, D.C. 2015 Agradecimientos En primer lugar, a Dios “todo poderoso” por brindarme grandes oportunidades en la vida, acompañarme en este camino y permitirme llegar hasta donde he llegado. En segundo lugar, a todas aquellas personas que hicieron posible alcanzar esta nueva meta: a mi familia que siempre creyó en mis capacidades, y a mi director de tesis, por orientarme en esta travesía intelectual. Gracias a todos. “La mezquina rapacidad y el espíritu de monopolio de los mercaderes no son ni deben ser los gobernantes de la humanidad”. Adam Smith, 1776. CONTENIDO RESUMEN………………………………………………………………………………………..6 ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………………….........7 INTRODUCCIÓN………………………………………………………………………………...8 CAPÍTULO 1 LA DISCUSIÓN SOBRE LOS ACTORES NO ESTATALES: PERSPECTIVA TEÓRICA………………………………………………………………………………………..13 1.1. El concepto de paradigma: aspectos generales en la disciplina de las Relaciones Internacionales………………………………………………………………………….14 12. El origen del debate sobre los nuevos actores en las Relaciones Internacionales………………………………………………………………………….17 1.3. La evolución de la discusión……………………………………………………….20 1.3.1. Los nuevos aportes sobre los actores no estatales…………………………21 1.3.1.1. La sociedad civil transnacional……………………………………24 1.3.1.2. Las empresas multinacionales…………………………………….25 1.4. Consideraciones finales……………………………………………………………27 CAPÍTULO 2 CARACTERIZACIÓN DE LOS ACTORES……………………………………………............28 2.1. Monsanto Company………………………………………………………………..29 2.1.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Monsanto Company in Microsoft Word Format Together with a Copy of the Transmittal Letter That Accompanies the Filing of Two Paper Copies of the Submission
    From: Letzler, Kenneth [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, December 31, 2009 1:03 PM To: ATR-Agricultural Workshops Subject: Comment Attached please find a comment submitted on behalf of Monsanto Company in Microsoft Word format together with a copy of the transmittal letter that accompanies the filing of two paper copies of the submission. _____________________________ U.S. Treasury Circular 230 Notice Any U.S. federal tax advice included in this communication (including any attachments) was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding U.S. federal tax-related penalties or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matter addressed herein. _____________________________ This communication may contain information that is legally privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please note that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Anyone who receives this message in error should notify the sender immediately by telephone or by return e-mail and delete it from his or her computer. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For more information about Arnold & Porter LLP, click here: http://www.arnoldporter.com Competition and Innovation in American Agriculture A Response to the American Antitrust Institute’s “Transgenic Seed Platforms: Competition Between a Rock and a Hard Place?” Submitted on Behalf of Monsanto Company In Response to the Request for Comments by the United States Department of Agriculture and United States Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, in Connection with Their Hearings on “Agriculture and Antitrust Enforcement Issues in Our 21st Century Economy” Vandy Howell, Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Scientific Developments on the Chemical Weapons Convention (IUPAC Technical Report)*
    Pure Appl. Chem., Vol. 85, No. 4, pp. 851–881, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1351/PAC-REP-12-11-18 © 2013 IUPAC, Publication date (Web): 16 February 2013 Impact of scientific developments on the Chemical Weapons Convention (IUPAC Technical Report)* Katie Smallwood1, Ralf Trapp2, Robert Mathews3, Beat Schmidt4, and Leiv K. Sydnes5,‡ 1Independent Consultant, Geneva, Switzerland; 2International Disarmament Consultant, 74270 Chessenaz, France; 3Defence Science and Technology Organisation, Australia; 4Spiez Laboratory, 3700 Spiez, Switzerland; 5Department of Chemistry, University of Bergen, 5007 Bergen, Norway Abstract: This document represents the final report of discussions and conclusions arising from the workshop on Developments in Science and Technology Relevant to the Chemical Weapons Convention, held in Spiez, Switzerland in February 2012. Keywords: Chemical Weapons Convention; CWC; implementation; science and technology; Third Review Conference. CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 2. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 Overall findings and recommendations 2.2 S&T advances and their impact on the scope of the CWC 2.3 Developments that affect the practical implementation of the CWC 2.4 S&T advances specifically relevant to verification 2.5 S&T advances specifically relevant to protection against CW 2.6 The evolution of the international S&T environment 2.7 Extending support for the CWC via outreach and education 3. THE WORKSHOP 3.1 Overview and background 3.2 Convergence of chemistry and biology 3.3 New synthesis and toxicological analysis methods 3.4 Developing new materials and delivery mechanisms 3.5 Technical discussion 3.6 Advances in industrial production methods 3.7 Chemical safety and security: Possession, transfer, and acquisition 3.8 Defense against CW agents 3.9 Chemical safety and security: Engaging the chemical sciences community *Sponsoring body: IUPAC Executive Committee: see more details on p.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Tide Monsanto
    Green Tide http://www.zmag.org/zmag/articles/mar99tokar.htm Monsanto: A Checkered History Who should choose our technologies? By Brian Tokar Headquartered just outside St. Louis, Missouri, the Monsanto Chemical Company was founded in 1901 by John Francis Queeny. Queeny, a self- educated chemist, brought the technology to manufacture saccharin, the first artificial sweetener, from Germany to the United States. In the 1920s, Monsanto became a leading manufacturer of sulfuric acid and other basic industrial chemicals, and is one of only four companies to be listed among the top ten U.S. chemical companies in every decade since the 1940s. By the 1940s, plastics and synthetic fabrics had become a centerpiece of Monsanto’s business. In 1947, a French freighter carrying ammonium nitrate fertilizer blew up at a dock 270 feet from Monsanto’s plastics plant outside Galveston, Texas. More than 500 people died in what came to be seen as one of the chemical industry’s first major disasters. The plant was manufacturing styrene and polystyrene plastics, which are still important constituents of food packaging and various consumer products. In the 1980s the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) listed polystyrene as fifth in its ranking of the chemicals whose production generates the most total hazardous waste. In 1929, the Swann Chemical Company, soon to be purchased by Monsanto, developed polychlori- nated biphenyls (PCBs), which were widely praised for their nonflammability and extreme chemical stability. The most widespread uses were in the electrical equipment industry, which adopted PCBs as a nonflammable coolant for a new generation of transformers.
    [Show full text]
  • A Global Citizens Report on the State of Gmos Synthesis Report !"#$%&'$#&(#)')$ "*+$,'$-.'!"#+
    !"#$%&'$#&(#)')$ "*+$,'$-.'!"#+ Published by A Global Citizens Report on the State of GMOs Synthesis Report !"#$%&'$#&(#)')$ "*+$,'$-.'!"#+ !"#$%&'$"()*)+,-."/,0%1*" %-"*2,"3*'*,"%4"#56."7 8'$.,"91%:).,.;"8')$,<"=,>2-%$%?),. 3@-*2,.)."/,0%1* Coordinated by Vandana Shiva, Navdanya Debbie Barker, Centre for Food Safety Caroline Lockhart, Navdanya International Front page cartoon: Sergio Staino Layout, production and printing: SICREA srl, Florence Contact: [email protected] Available for download at www.navdanyainternational.it www.navdanya.org Thanks go to all those who readily contributed in the realization of this report, particularly Sergio Staino, creator of the cover cartoon, Maurizio Izzo of Sicrea for production and Massimo Orlandi for press and communications. Thanks also go to Christina Stafford and interns Tara McNerney and Tanvi Gadhia of Center for Food Safety (CFS) and Sulakshana Fontana, Elena Bellini and Filippo Cimo of Navdanya International for their diligent coordination, editing and translation efforts. Final thanks also go to Giannozzo Pucci, Maria Grazia Mammuccini and Natale Bazzanti for their cooperation and assistance in realizing this report. This publication is printed on ecological paper SYMBOL FREELIFE SATIN ECF *$%/012/$-3435678$)690:4$ 07$4;6$+4246$0<$%&'8$=$ >2/86$(:0?3868@$>23/6A$!6B;70/0C368 Coordinated by Navdanya and Navdanya International, the International Commission on the Future of Food and Agriculture, with the participation of The Center for Food Safety (CFS) Contributing organizations:
    [Show full text]
  • Who Will Control the Green Economy? ETC Group, 2011
    !"#$%&''$(#)*+#'$*",$ -+,,)$.(#)#/01 23$4#5,+)/,)*3$6+,67+,$*#$37)(*&#)$7$-+,,) .(#)#/0 7*$8&#9:;<$.=>$-+#?6$6+#5&@,3$ 7)$?6@7*,$#)$(#+6#+7*,$6#%,+$7)@$ %7+)3$*"7*$*",$A?,3*$*#$(#)*+#'$B&#/733$ %&''$6,+6,*?7*,$*",$-+,,@ .(#)#/0C %%%C,*(4+#?6C#+4 “We are told by men of science that all the venture of mariners on the sea, all that counter-marching tribes and races that confounds old history with its dust and rumour, sprang from nothing more abstruse than the laws of supply and demand, and a certain natural instinct for cheap rations. To any one thinking deeply, this will seem a dull and pitiful explanation.” —Robert Louis Stevenson, Will o’ the Mill, 1901 “As long as the maximization of profit remains the cornerstone of acquisitive society and capitalist economy, corporations will retain their interest in scarcity as a creator of economic value.” —German-born economist, Erich W. Zimmermann, in World resources and industries: a functional appraisal of the availability of agricultural and industrial materials, 1933 2(D)#%',@4,/,)*3 All original artwork, including the cover illustration, “BioMassters: The Board Game,” and report design by Shtig. ETC Group gratefully acknowledges the financial support of SwedBio (Sweden), HKH Foundation (USA), CS Fund “Trickle Down” by Adam Zyglis used with permission. (USA), Christensen Fund (USA), Heinrich Böll Who Will Control the Green Economy? is ETC Group Foundation (Germany), the Lillian Goldman Charitable Communiqué no. 107. Trust (USA), Oxfam Novib (Netherlands) and the Norwegian Forum for Environment and Development. November 2011 ETC Group is solely responsible for the views expressed in All ETC Group publications are available free of charge this document.
    [Show full text]
  • Seattle V. Monsanto Complaint
    Case 2:16-cv-00107-RSL Document 31 Filed 05/04/16 Page 1 of 27 1 THE HONORABLE ROBERT S. LASNIK 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 9 CITY OF SEATTLE, a municipal corporation ) CASE NO. 2:16-cv-00107-RSL located in the County of King, State of ) 10 Washington, ) PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED ) COMPLAINT 11 Plaintiffs, ) ) 12 v. ) ) 13 MONSANTO COMPANY, ) SOLUTIA INC., and ) 14 PHARMACIA CORPORATION, and DOES 1 ) through 100, ) 15 ) Defendants. ) 16 ________________________________________ I. INTRODUCTION 17 1. Polychlorinated biphenyls (or “PCBs”) are man-made chemical compounds that 18 have become notorious as global environmental contaminants — found in bays, oceans, rivers, 19 streams, soil, and air. As a result, PCBs have been detected in the tissues of all living beings on 20 earth including all forms of marine life, various animals and birds, plants and trees, and humans. 21 2. The extent of environmental PCB contamination is troubling because PCBs cause 22 a variety of adverse health effects. In humans, PCB exposure is associated with cancer as well as 23 serious non-cancer health effects, including effects on the immune system, reproductive system, PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - 1 Peter S. Holmes Seattle City Attorney 701 5th Avenue, Suite 2050 Seattle, WA 98104-7097 (206) 684-8200 Case 2:16-cv-00107-RSL Document 31 Filed 05/04/16 Page 2 of 27 1 nervous system, endocrine system and other health effects. In addition, PCBs destroy 2 populations of fish, birds, and other animal life. 3 3.
    [Show full text]
  • World Resources Institute the Monsanto Company
    World Resources Institute Sustainable Enterprise Program A program of the World Resources Institute The Monsanto Company: Quest for Sustainability (A) “Biotechnology represents a potentially sustainable For more than a decade, WRI's solution to the issue, not only of feeding people, but of providing Sustainable Enterprise Program (SEP) the economic growth that people are going to need to escape has harnessed the power of business to poverty…… [Biotechnology] poses the possibility of create profitable solutions to leapfrogging the industrial revolution and moving to a post- environment and development industrial society that is not only economically attractive, but challenges. BELL, a project of SEP, is also environmentally sustainable.i ” focused on working with managers and academics to make companies --Robert Shapiro, CEO, Monsanto Company more competitive by approaching social and environmental challenges as unmet market needs that provide Upon his promotion to CEO of chemical giant The business growth opportunities through Monsanto Company in 1995, Robert Shapiro became a vocal entrepreneurship, innovation, and champion of sustainable development and sought to redefine the organizational change. firm’s business strategy along principles of sustainability. Shapiro’s rhetoric was compelling. He captured analysts’ Permission to reprint this case is attention with the specter of mass hunger and environmental available at the BELL case store. degradation precipitated by rapid population growth and the Additional information on the Case
    [Show full text]
  • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
    E-Served: Feb 26 2019 2:09PM PST Via Case Anywhere 1 Kelly A. Evans (pro hac vice) ([email protected]) 2 Jay J. Schuttert (pro hac vice) ([email protected]) 3 EVANS FEARS & SCHUTTERT LLP 2300 West Sahara Avenue, Suite 900 4 Las Vegas, NV 89102 Tel: (702) 805-0290 5 Fax: (702) 805-0291 6 Tarek Ismail (pro hac vice) ([email protected]) 7 Joe Tomaselli (pro hac vice) ([email protected]) 8 GOLDMAN ISMAIL TOMASELLI BRENNAN & BAUM LLP 564 West Randolph Street, Suite 400 9 Chicago, IL 60661 Tel: (312) 881-5970 10 Fax: (312) 881-5191 11 Attorneys for Defendant MONSANTO COMPANY *Additional counsel listed on signature block 12 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 13 FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA 14 COORDINATION PROCEEDING JCCP NO. 4953 15 SPECIAL TITLE (Rule 3.550) ASSIGNED FOR ALL PURPOSES TO 16 ROUNDUP PRODUCTS CASES JUDGE WINIFRED SMITH DEPARTMENT 21 17 THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF 18 DEFENDANT MONSANTO’S MOTION PILLIOD, ET AL. v. MONSANTO CO., FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE 19 ET AL., CASE NO. RG17862702 ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION 20 Hearing Date: March 7, 2019 21 Time: 10:00 a.m. Department: 21 22 Reservation No.: R-2048303 23 24 25 26 27 28 303303266v1 1017234 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 Page 3 I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1 4 II. ARGUMENT ........................................................................................................................ 1 5 A. Plaintiffs’ Warnings Claims Are Expressly Preempted. ........................................... 1 B. Plaintiffs Do Not Dispute That It Is Impossible for Monsanto to Both Comply 6 with FIFRA and Provide the Warnings Plaintiffs Seek.
    [Show full text]
  • Alameda County Superior Court Ex Parte Declaration
    Alameda County Superior Court Ex Parte Declaration Which Clare shaft so soothly that Thorpe aggregates her mutualism? When Zacharia revitalising his caudexes malleated not herpetologically enough, is Edsel primeval? Is Jonathan always far-sighted and polypous when separate some pogy very prancingly and tunably? 16 County have in his personal capacity submit a smart and. 2 requesting a triai by declaration or 3 appearing via telephone conference. Superior form Of California County Of Orange. Free people read Powered by Superior realm of California County of Alameda Google Translate. The where Law Division operates in the Family living Center courthouse. Attendi mentre verifichiamo che condivide la organización, county superior courthouses. Contra Costa County business Court Department 31. The superior court customers that most services and electronic service windows to file an extremely risky proposition, plaintiffs opposition to. There is on a declaration: ex parte application for alameda county courthouse. J Hayward also offers a robust Access Hayward smartphone application. Or seventeen days in brawl the case such be retried de novo in landmark court Id at 11 Whether Alameda County provides representative data is intelligent open question. Other forms depending which utility you differ to file your ex parte RFO. The Court must declare their actions unconstitutional and inspect order them would cease. The court prefers to resolve ex parte applications on the papers only. The fact giving an application for some ship was actually before every court of. Coronavirus-Related Court Announcements. 1 Ex B F The asylum Court reserved jurisdiction to determine financial issues. Superior nature of California County of Alameda 2120 Martin Luther King Jr Way.
    [Show full text]
  • Detecting and Decontaminating Chemical and Biological Agents
    Making the UK safer: detecting and decontaminating chemical and biological agents Policy document 06/04 April 2004 ISBN 0 85403 598 2 This report can be found at www.royalsoc.ac.uk ISBN 0 85403 598 2 © The Royal Society 2004. Requests to reproduce all or part of this document should be submitted to: Science Advice Section The Royal Society 6–9 Carlton House Terrace London SW1Y 5AG email [email protected] ii | April 2004 | The Royal Society Making the UK safer Making the UK safer: detecting and decontaminating chemical and biological agents Contents Page Summary 1 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Background to project 3 1.2 Conduct of project 4 1.3 Types and properties of possible agents 4 1.4 Types of possible incident 5 2 Priorities, concepts of use and implementation of detection systems 7 2.1 Detection, identification and monitoring 7 2.2 Activities and decision-making at different stages of an incident 7 2.3 User requirements and concepts of use 10 2.4 Current detection and monitoring technologies 10 2.5 Issues needing to be addressed 11 2.6 Key detection system requirements 11 2.7 Validation and implementation 11 2.8 Impacts on detection 11 2.9 Conclusions and recommendations 12 3 Issues relating to sampling 13 3.1 Introduction 13 3.2 Sampling strategies 13 3.3 Sampling issues needing to be addressed 14 3.4 Distribution of agent 14 3.5 Air sampling 15 3.6 Biological agent release 15 3.7 Chemical agent release 16 3.8 Conclusions and recommendations 16 4 Current capabilities and future needs of detection 17 4.1 Technologies for detecting
    [Show full text]