In Re. Xxxxx Xxx Xxxxxxx, Xx. 00-00000 (Xxxxxx Xxxxxx Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of Ohio). Creditor challenging legacy structured settlement order in annuitant’s Chapter 7 Bankruptcy proceeding.
In Re. NuvaRing Litigation, BER-L-3081-09 (the “New Jersey Coordinated Proceedings”), venued in the New Jersey Superior Court, Law Division, Bergen County (the “New Jersey Coordinated Court”); and (4) any and all other state court proceedings pertaining to actions, disputes, and claims asserted against Defendants regarding the use of NuvaRing (the “Other State Court Proceedings”).
B. NPC, having been duly authorized by the MDL Court and the New Jersey Coordinated Court, and Organon have agreed to establish a private settlement program to resolve certain Claims (the “NuvaRing Resolution Program” or the “Program”).
C. An opportunity for participation in the NuvaRing Resolution Program is open to Claims in the MDL, in the Other Federal Court Proceedings, in the New Jersey Coordinated Proceedings, and in the Other State Court Proceedings, that were pending in those proceedings on or before the Execution Date, and that involve an Alleged Injury resulting from the use of NuvaRing, as specified in this Agreement.
D. With respect to unfiled claims, an opportunity for participation in the Program is also open to any Claimants with Claims that are not pending against Defendants in state or federal court but that involve an Alleged Injury occurring in the United States prior to the Execution Date allegedly resulting from the use of NuvaRing, and who duly execute and serve the Notice of Intent to Opt In Form for Unfiled Claims and Declaration of Counsel in accordance with Section 1.04 of this Agreement.
E. Defendants deny any liability or wrongdoing and assert that they have meritorious affirmative defenses to these lawsuits and claims. This Agreement, accordingly, will not be construed as evidence of, or as an admission by Defendants of, any fault, liability, wrongdoing, or damages whatsoever.
F. The Parties agree and understand that this Agreement shall not be used, cited, or relied upon in any manner in any future cases or settlements without the express approval of NPC and Organon, other than as necessary to enforce the Agreement.
G. All sums awarded under this Agreement constitute damages on account of personal physical injuries or sickness, within the meaning of §104(a)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code.
H. There is no guarantee that every Person who has made a claim or is the subject of a lawsuit and who is enrolled in the Program will be determined to be eligible to receive compensation under the terms of this Agreement.
In Re. Yasmin and YAZ (Drospirenone) Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2100 (the “MDL”), a federal multi-district litigation venued in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois (the “MDL Court”); (2) any other federal court proceedings pertaining to actions, disputes, and claims asserted against Defendants regarding the use of drospirenone- containing oral contraceptives manufactured by Bayer or manufactured or marketed by BarrTeva (collectively, “DCOCs”), either pending in that court or removed therefrom and awaiting transfer to the MDL (collectively, the “Other Federal Court Proceedings”), and (3) In re Yaz, Yasmin and Ocella Contraceptive Cases, Case No. JCCP 4608 (Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles) (the “California Coordinated Proceedings”), In RE: Yaz/Yasmin/Ocella Litigation, BER-L-3572-10 (Superior Court, Law Division, Bergen County) (the “New Jersey Coordinated Proceedings”), and In re: Yaz/Yasmin/Ocella/Gianvi Products Liability Litigation, September Term, 2009. No 1307 (Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Trial Division-Civil) (the “Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Coordinated Proceeding”) pending in their respective courts (collectively, the “State Coordinating Courts”). The Gallbladder Resolution Program established pursuant to this Settlement Agreement also is open to Claimants in any and all other state court proceedings pertaining to actions, disputes, and claims asserted against Defendants regarding the use of DCOCs (together with the cases pending in the State Coordinating Courts, the “State Court Proceedings”).
In Re. Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx, No. 1:15-bk-02164 (Bankr. M.D. Tenn.)
In Re. Rust-Oleum Restore Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litig., No. 1:15-cv-01364 (N.D. Ill.); In re: Sears, Xxxxxxx and Co. Front-Loader Washer Products Liability Litig., No. 1:06-cv-07023 (N.D. Ill.); Xxxxx x. Xxxxxx Nutrition International, Inc., No. 3:11-CV-01056 (S.D. Cal.); Xxxx v.
In Re. Actos (Pioglitazone) Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2299 (the “MDL”), a federal multi- district litigation venued in the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana (the “MDL Court”); (2) any other federal court proceedings, either pending in that court or awaiting transfer to the MDL (collectively, the “Other Federal Court Proceedings”); (3) In re Actos Related Cases, No. 2011 L 010011 (the “Illinois Coordinated Proceedings”), venued in the Circuit Court of Xxxx County, Illinois, County Department, Law Division (the “Illinois Coordinated Court”); (4) In Re Actos Product Liability Cases Coordinated Proceeding, JCCP No. 4696 (the “California Coordinated Proceedings”), venued in the California Superior Court, Los Angeles County, California (the “California Coordinated Court”); and (5) any and all other state court proceedings (the “Other State Court Proceedings”).
In Re. Power Purchase Agreement between Duke Energy Progress, LLC and Olanta Solar, LLC ) ) ) ) ) ) PROPOSED ORDER RULING ON REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIALITY This matter comes before the Public Service Commission of South Carolina (“Commission”) upon the filing of an amendment to a Power Purchase Agreement (“PPA”) between Duke Energy Progress, LLC (“DEP” or the “Company”) and Olanta Solar, LLC (“Olanta Solar”) with the Commission (“October 5 Filing”). The amendment revised the PPA previously accepted for filing by the Commission in Order No. 2016-146 (“Amendment”). In the October 5 Filing, DEP submitted a request for confidential treatment due to the commercially sensitive and proprietary nature of certain portions of the Amendment. DEP included with the October 5 Filing a redacted version of the Amendment illustrating the portions for which confidentiality was sought. On October 24, 2017, the Office of Regulatory Staff (“ORS”) filed a letter objecting to DEP’s confidentiality request, noting that certain headers, column labels, and definitions were redacted, and requested that the Commission deny the Company’s request unless and until the Company demonstrated why the redacted provisions are confidential. On December 1, 2017, DEP filed a revised Amendment with fewer redactions along with a memorandum supporting its request for confidential treatment. On December 5, 2017, ORS filed a letter maintaining its objection to DEP’s confidentiality ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2018 February 26 3:26 PM - SCPSC - Docket # 2016-42-E - Page 2 of 8 request. On December 8, 2017, the standing hearing officer issued a directive indicating that the Commission would rule on DEP’s request for confidentiality in its December 20, 2017 business meeting and instructing the parties to file any further briefs by December 13, 2017. DEP filed a brief on December 13, 2017, and, on December 20, 2017, the Commission issued a directive requiring that the Amendment remain sealed and instructed Commission staff to schedule an oral argument as to the redacted documents. An oral argument was held on February 6, 2018. For the reasons stated herein, we accept the Amendment to the PPA for filing and grant DEP’s request to treat the Amendment as confidential.
In Re. Human Tissue Litigation Donor Families vs. Biomedical Tissue Services, et al, as more particularly described on filings made by the Borrower with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Biologic Recovery Group, Inc. RTI Services, Inc. Regeneration Technologies, Inc. – Cardiovascular Tutogen Medical, Inc. RTI Donor Service, Inc. (controlled) Tutogen Medical (United States), Inc. Tutogen Medical, GmbH (Germany) Tutogen Medical, SARL (France) [Subsidiary of Tutogen Medical GmbH] None. From 1/1/2006-2/27/2008: Xxx Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx, Xxxxxxx 00000 Prior to 1/1/2006: 0000 XxXxxxx Xxxxxx, West Paterson New Jersey 07424 On 2/27/08, as a result of the merger with Tutogen Medical, Inc., Regeneration Technologies, Inc. became RTI Biologics, Inc. Diesel Fuel Acetone Human tissues None. HypoVereinsbank (2) Term Loan $ 374k 6-30-2011 HypoVereinsbank Term Loan $ 1,145k 3-30-2012 HypoVereinsbank Term Loan $ 1,240k 12-30-2016 HypoVereinsbank (3) Interim Constr $ 1,224k TBD HypoVereinsbank Term Loan $ 275k 9-30-2012 HypoVereinsbank LOC $ 1,442k Revolving
(1) Assumes Euro rate of 1.40970/$1
(2) HypoVereinsbank debt (up to 4 million euros) guaranteed by Tutogen Medical, Inc. Tutogen Medical, Inc. guaranty in the process of transferring to RTI Biologics, Inc.
(3) Construction loan in process with build out of GmbH bovine facility. Total loan will be $1,374k by 3/31/09 and will then term out over 5-6 years.
In Re. Xxxx X. Xxxxxxx, Bureau Docket No. INS-08-305; and
In Re. Stone Energy Corporation Securities Litigation, Docket No. 05-cv-02088, United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, Lafayette Division. The complaint alleges that the defendants, among other things, misstated or failed to disclose (i) that Stone had materially overstated the Company’s financial results by overvaluing its oil reserves through improper and aggressive reserve methodologies, (ii) that Stone lacked adequate internal controls and was therefore unable to ascertain its true financial condition, and (iii) that as a result of the foregoing, the values of Stone’s proven reserves, assets and future net cash flows were materially overstated at all relevant times.
