MIAMI – The Third District Court of Appeal has decided to dismiss a petition on the grounds the petitioners have not proven that they were caused irreparable harm.
Petitioners American Medical Systems LLC, etc., et al. sought a writ of certiorari to quash a trial court’s non-final order denying their motions to dismiss the amended complaint for a pure bill of discovery filed by respondents MSP Recovery Claims Series LLC, et al.
"Because petitioners have failed to demonstrate the requisite irreparable harm, we lack jurisdiction to hear, and therefore dismiss, the instant petition," the Dec. 11 opinion states. Judges Kevin Emas, Thomas Logue and Edwin Scales III heard the motion.
The respondents filed an amended complaint for a pure bill of discovery against the petitioners in January, asking that they identify whether certain Medicare beneficiaries were implanted with pelvic mesh products they sold. The petitioners moved to dismiss the amended complaint on May 3, claiming that the respondents had failed to state a valid claim for a pure bill of discovery.
The Miami-Dade County Circuit Court held a hearing for the petitioners' motion to dismiss on July 9 and denied it. The petitioners later filed an instant petition in August with the Court of Appeal seeking certiorari review of the trial court’s order.
The respondents answered the petition and moved to dismiss it, arguing the petitioners could not demonstrate the harm that the Court of Appeals for jurisdiction and that the trial court only ordered them to answer the amended complaint.
"We agree that petitioners have not established that the challenged order – merely denying their motion to dismiss – results in the requisite irreparable harm to vest us with jurisdiction, and therefore dismiss the instant petition," the opinion states.
"...By comparison, because the challenged order in this case requires only that petitioners file an answer to respondents’ amended complaint – and does not require production of any discovery – petitioners are unable to establish the requisite irreparable harm for us to exercise certiorari jurisdiction...We, therefore, cannot reach the question of whether the subject order departs from the essential requirements of the law."