Ottesen

Ottesen v. Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 13, 20244:19-cv-07271California2,455 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 ALLISON OTTESEN, et al., Case No. 19-cv-07271-JST

8 Plaintiffs,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

9 v. CERTIFY ORDER FOR

INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL AND

10 HI-TECH PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., MOTION TO STAY PENDING

APPEAL

Defendant. 11 Re: ECF No. 75 12 13 Before the Court is Defendant Hi-Tech’s motion to certify the Court’s October 17, 2023 14 order lifting the stay of the case for interlocutory appeal and motion to stay pending appeal. ECF 15 No. 75. The Court will grant the motions. 16 I. BACKGROUND 17 Because the facts are well-known to the parties and the Court has summarized Plaintiffs’ 18 allegations in detail in its prior orders, ECF Nos. 41, 70, the Court will not elaborate them here. 19 In sum, this case concerns the alleged use of DMHA1 in supplements manufactured, 20 distributed, and sold by Defendant Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. On November 20, 2020, the 21 Court stayed the case on primary jurisdiction grounds, “pending a determination by the FDA 22 regarding the…

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.