United States: Statute Of Limitations Undoes Class Action That Has No Legs Anyway

Last Updated: March 12 2014
Article by Steven Boranian

One of the best developments in drug and device law over the last 15 years has been the demise of the class action. Although seen by plaintiffs and some commentators as convenient devices that can be used to resolve large numbers of claims in bunches, courts have generally come to understand that class actions just don't work in cases involving drugs and medical devices. The differences among the claims and the claimants are just too numerous, making class actions all but uncertifiable outside of the settlement context. (See our class certification denial cheat sheets here and here.)

When class actions are filed against drug and medical device manufacturer these days, they usually look like Plumlee v. Pfizer, Inc., No. 13-CV-00414-LHK, 2014 LEXIS 23172 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 21, 2014). A patient who had used both branded and generic Zoloft filed a class action against the innovator manufacturer, but not because there was anything allegedly wrong with the product or because she had experienced any alleged side effect. The plaintiff does not even appear to have alleged that the product failed to work as well as it was supposed to. She allegedly took the medicine for more than three years, which suggests to us that she was benefiting from the therapy. Id. at **9-10.

So what was the plaintiff's beef? Well, she alleged that the innovator manufacturer made numerous misrepresentations, basically by allegedly overstating the effectiveness of the drug in the label and in marketing. Our favorite allegation is that the manufacturer marketed the product to doctors through sales representatives who were "typically young attractive people." Id. at **8-9. Perhaps the plaintiff is referring to the 2010 motion picture Love & Other Drugs, which starred Hollywood hunk Jake Gyllenhaal as a sales rep for the drug company that also happens to be the defendant in this case. (The movie also presented a cavalier and horribly insensitive portrayal of patients with Parkinson's disease, but that's a topic for another day.) We don't know what movies the plaintiff has seen, but we do know that her objective was to recover the purchase price of the drug for herself and other patients under California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act, Unfair Competition Law, and False Advertising Law. Id. at *17.

There are so many things wrong with this lawsuit, we hardly know where to start. For one thing, we emphasize again that this plaintiff did not allege any injury. For all we know, she got exactly what she paid for, which makes us (and the defendant) wonder how she had standing to sue at all. In addition, having just read yesterday's post on statutory safe harbors for consumer claims, we wonder whether this action falls into California's safe harbor for "business practices which the Legislature has expressly declared to be lawful in other legislation," see Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co., 973 P.2d 527, 542 (Cal. 1999). Plaintiff was complaining about FDA-approved labeling, and although we doubt that any safe harbor applies, maybe one should. We also wonder how the plaintiff ever hoped to get a class certified. Claims based on alleged misrepresentations, whether in the drug and device context or not, present myriad individual issues, including and particularly on causation. Did the prescriber review the label or see any marketing? Would different information on the drug's efficacy have made any impact? If the sales representative was actually as young and attractive as Jake Gyllenhaal (or his beautiful co-star Anne Hathaway), would the physician have been more or less influenced by the purported sales pitch? Good luck attempting to adjudicate these individual issues and countless others on a classwide basis.

Thankfully, it looks like we may never know the answers to these questions, because in the end, the undoing of the plaintiff's complaint was the statute of limitations. The plaintiffs' claims were subject to three-year and four-year statutes of limitations, and the most interesting part of the order is the part addressing when the plaintiff's claim accrued. This, again, was a consumer action seeking a refund of the purchase price, so the claim accrued when the plaintiff last purchased the product. Plumlee, at **22-24. This makes sense to us and apparently also to the plaintiff, who conceded that "her injury was deception at the point of sale." Id. at *24 n.5.

It also makes sense that the district court rejected the plaintiff's attempt to invoke the discovery rule to delay accrual. California's discovery rule "postpones accrual of a claim until 'the plaintiff discovers or has reason to discovery the cause of action.'" Id. at *26 (citations omitted). Under this rule, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving not only delayed discovery, but also that he or she could not have discovery the claim with reasonable diligence. As the district court held,

"A plaintiff whose complaint shows on its face that his claim would be barred without the benefit of the discovery rule must specifically plead facts to show (1) the time and manner of discovery and (2) the inability to have made earlier discovery despite reasonable diligence. The burden is on the plaintiff to show diligence, and conclusory allegations will not withstand" a motion to dismiss.


Id. at *26 (citations omitted). We are not completely convinced that discovery rules should exist at all. But if we must have discovery rules, this formulation is as good as any, particularly its allocation of a burden to specifically plead reasonable diligence.

The district court's application of the discovery rule was as good as it gets, too. The plaintiff claimed that she did not discover the alleged untruthfulness of the defendant's statements until years after she last purchased the drug. Id. at *28. But this is the age of TwIqbal plausibility, id., at *4, and that bare allegation did not meet the plaintiff's burden because she did not allege specifically the time and manner of her discovery. In other words, she failed to allege when and how she "learned" that clinical trials allegedly undermined the defendant's representations. Id. Plaintiff's allegations also did not meet her burden of reasonable diligence, and although the quote below is kind of long, it is worth reading because it provides a roadmap to responding to plaintiffs like this one:

Plaintiff pleads absolutely no facts that would support a finding that she was "not negligent in failing to make the discovery sooner and that [s]he had no actual or presumptive knowledge of facts sufficient to put [her] on inquiry." . . . To the contrary, the Complaint identifies and relies upon several published articles regarding the efficacy of [the drug] and other related drugs that were published many years before Plaintiff filed suit. . . . Plaintiff does not explain why she was unaware of these publications before "early 2012" when she allegedly discovered the misrepresentation for the first time, nor explains why these publications did not serve to put her on notice that Defendant may have made misrepresentations about [the drug's] efficacy. Furthermore, nothing in the Complaint provides the Court a basis to conclude that Plaintiff was unable to learn of [the defendant's] alleged misrepresentations and omissions until 2012 despite reasonable diligence. Plaintiff does not allege that she took any steps towards discovery.


Id. at **29-30 (emphasis in original, citations omitted). So, yes, the same tougher pleading rules can be used against plaintiffs trying to plead into discovery rules. This is about as direct a holding as you are ever going to see. It also correctly describes the standard of reasonable diligence, correctly assigns the burden to the plaintiff to plead specific facts, and correctly calls the plaintiff out for failing to meet that burden. Onto our TwIqbal cheat sheet this one goes.

The only problem we have with the order is that the court granted leave to amend. This class action has no legs, and hopefully the next motion to dismiss will put an end to the case for good. Plaintiff surely is between a rock and a hard place: She kept her allegations general and vague with the hope that omitting her specific facts would help her on class certification. But now the court has called her hand, and even if she is able to plead the specifics required for delayed discovery, the statute of limitations is the least of her problems. We don't know how this thriller ends, but we know how we would write the script if it were up to us. The End.

This article is presented for informational purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal advice.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions