Legal Opinion
In re Viagra Products Liability Litigation
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided August 19, 2009No. MDL No. 06-1724(PAM)PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
PAUL A. MAGNUSON, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Pfizer, Inc.’s Motion to Exclude the Testimony of Gerald McGwin, Ph.D. and on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File a Supplemental Expert Report of Gerald McGwin, Ph.D. For the reasons that follow, Pfizer’s Motion is GRANTED and Plaintiffs’ Motion is DENIED.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs are suing Pfizer because they allege that one of Pfizer’s drugs, Viagra, caused them to suffer vision loss from a disorder known as non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (“NAION”). Plaintiffs’ sole remaining general causation…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Kumho Tire Co. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. HavnerTexas Supreme Court · 1997
- Raymond Rosen v. Ciba-Geigy CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1996
- Wegener v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2008
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Wagoner v. Exxon Mobil Corp.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 2011
- In Re Viagra Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2009
- In re Roundup Prods. Liab. Litig.District Court, N.D. California · 2018
- In Re Prempro Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 2010
- Beylin v. WyethDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 2010
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.