Photo of Bexis

Sometimes, we feel as though we’re writing in code.
Take the headline of this post, for example, which talks about the Accutane MDL IBD cases.
So be it, we suppose: There’s not a very good alternative.
Two years ago, Judge Moody, who’s overseeing the Accutane MDL, granted Hoffman-La Roche Inc’s motion to exclude plaintiffs’ general causation expert who sought to link the ingestion of Accutane to inflammatory bowel disease, or “IBD.” (Ever vigilant, we posted about that decision here.)
Last week, Judge Moody granted summary judgment dismissing the second group of cases in the IBD track. Here’s a link, for the curious, although there’s not much legal substance to Judge Moody’s order. This ruling is more factually interesting than legally important.
The summary judgment ruling necessarily flowed from Judge Moody’s earlier exclusion of the general causation expert. The plaintiffs had, however, filed a motion asking the court to defer ruling because of supposedly “newly discovered” evidence. The court rejected that argument, and this new ruling dismisses five of the cases that avoided dismissal in the first Daubert ruling.
This leaves only one IBD case pending against Roche in the Accutane MDL.
We can hear the fat lady warming up.