(PS) Holcomb v. Pfizer Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 14, 20221:20-cv-01008California5,224 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DAVID L. HOLCOMB, No. 1:20-cv-01008-ADA-BAM 12 Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S

13 v. MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE

PLEADINGS

14 PFIZER, INC. AND DOES 1–100, INCLUSIVE, (ECF No. 10) 15 Defendants. ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO AMEND 16 PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT WITHIN

TWENTY-ONE (21) DAYS

17 18 I. 19 Procedural History 20 Plaintiff David Holcomb filed this action in California state court on April 27, 2020. (See 21 ECF No. 1 at 11.) In his complaint, Plaintiff asserts four causes of action against Defendant 22 Pfizer: (1) negligence; (2) breach of express warranty; (3) breach of implied warranty; and (4) 23 strict liability for manufacturing defects, design defects, and failure to warn. (Id.) Defendant 24 received a summons on July 16, 2020. (Id. at 10.) The next day, Defendant removed this case to 25 the Eastern District of California asserting subject…

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.