Last week (we think; it was before Levine anyway) we reported on the belated and meritless recusal motion filed by the plaintiffs in the Sprint-Fidelis litigation. We were remiss in not reporting sooner, but the other day, the court denied the motion, as it well should have. The last section of the opinion discussed some of the practical implications that we raised about how requiring recusal in that situation could cause significant problems in the judiciary.

Also, we (well, Herrmann, because Bexis is part of the Seroquel defense team) blogged earlier about the magistrate’s evidentiary rulings in the Seroquel MDL, one of which was to exclude foreign regulatory actions. We’re happy to report that this decision was upheld by the judge yesterday, with a nice little opinion discussing how foreign regulatory decisions are irrelevant because they are based upon different regulatory standards than prevail in this country.