Skip to main content
Third Circuit· 11/27/2018

Ari Weitzner v. Sanofi Pasteur Inc

Citations

  • 909 F.3d 604

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • concluding that in response to a party’s failure to comply with M.D. Pa. L.R. 56.1 “the District Court's decision to employ any given sanction—out of the many possible sanctions available to it—is fully within the discretion of that Court”
  • noting that American Pipe “included no express restrictions in the broad language it used to describe the claims to which tolling would apply”
  • explaining that “a district court’s interpretation and application of its own local rules should generally be reviewed for abuse of discretion”
  • noting that American Pipe “included no express restrictions in the broad language it used to describe the claims to which tolling would apply”
  • providing that “China Agritech precludes the application of American Pipe tolling to such successive class claims,” and therefore “plaintiffs’ class claims are not subject to tolling”
  • finding that a court confronted with a failure to comply with LR 56.1 “is in the best position to determine . . . the appropriate sanction for such noncompliance.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Smith, McKee, Restrepo

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Ari Weitzner v. Sanofi Pasteur Inc

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.