Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Gill-Samuel v. Nova Biomedical Corp.

Gill-Samuel v. Nova Biomedical Corp.

United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

April 8, 2014, Decided; April 9, 2014, Entered on Docket

Case No. 13-62591-CIV-ROSENBAUM/HUNT

Opinion

 [*695]  ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO DISMISS, AND DENYING MOTION TO STRIKE CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS

This cause is before the Court upon Defendant Nova Biomedical Corporation's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 8] and Motion to Strike Class Action Allegations [ECF No. 9]. The Court has reviewed the Motions, all supporting and opposing filings, and the record in this case. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants in part and denies in part Nova's Motion to Dismiss and denies Nova's Motion to Strike Class Action Allegations.

BACKGROUND

On November 27, 2013, Plaintiff Robin Gill-Samuel's state-court Class Action Complaint was removed to this Court. See  [**2] ECF No. 1. Plaintiff's Complaint brings claims of product liability and negligence against Defendant Nova Biomedical Corporation ("Nova"), a manufacturer of prescription blood-glucose test strips. ECF No. 1-1 at 5-8, ¶¶ 25-38. Nova announced a voluntary recall of 62 million of its test strips on July 29, 2013. Id. at ¶ 2. The recalled test strips are alleged to have reported abnormally high blood-glucose readings. Id. at 3, ¶ 12.

In December 2012, Plaintiff used Nova's test strips and, because of a blood-glucose reading that Plaintiff alleges was falsely high due to the product defect, Plaintiff sought medical treatment that was later determined to be unnecessary. Id. ¶ 13. In August 2013, Plaintiff received a letter from her pharmacy indicating that Plaintiff had received one or more test strips whose lot number was included in the recall. Id. ¶ 14. Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of all persons who purchased Nova's test strips that were subject to the July-August 2013 recall and, in addition, on behalf of a subclass of these persons who incurred additional medically related expenses as a result of the strips' improper test results. Id. at 3-4, ¶¶ 15, 16.

DISCUSSION

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

298 F.R.D. 693 *; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59374 **; 2014 WL 1661496

ROBIN GILL-SAMUEL, Plaintiff, v. NOVA BIOMEDICAL CORPORATION, Defendant.

Prior History: Gill-Samuel v. Nova Biomedical Corp., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 189041 (S.D. Fla., Feb. 18, 2014)

CORE TERMS

allegations, class certification, strips, motion to strike, class-action, motion to dismiss, economic-loss, factual allegations, cases, medical treatment, district court, blood-glucose, certification, manufacturer, replaced, warranty, asserts, brings