Gail Holmes v. Johnson & Johnson

Good Law
617 F. App'x 639
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 30, 201513-55821California2,164 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff-Appellant Gail Holmes (“Holmes”) appeals the district court’s dismissal of her claims against Defendants- Appellees Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Research & Development, LLC, and Jans-sen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (collectively, “Johnson” or “Defendants”). We AFFIRM IN PART and REVERSE IN PART.

I. Factual and Procedural Background

Unless otherwise noted, the following facts are based on allegations as set forth in the second amended complaint (“SAC”), Holmes’ live pleading at the time of the district court’s dismissal order. Prior to the events described below, Holmes was “a healthy individual who engaged in activities of daily living with vigor and enthusiasm.” However, between September and December of 2009, Holmes’ health condition dramatically deteriorated, resulting in various diagnoses and treatments during this time. She was ultimately diagnosed with Stevens Johnson Syndrome and/or Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (“SJS/TEN”), a condition constituting “an extremely severe cutaneous adverse reaction — involving skin necrolysis, blistering, and mucous membrane destruction, through an autoimmune mechanism.”

Holmes’ ordeal began in early September when, on suspicion…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.