Free Case Transferred In - District Transfer - District Court of California - California

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 1 of 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page 1 of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 2 of 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page 2 of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 3 of 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page 3 of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 4 of 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page 4 of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 5 of 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page 5 of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 6 of 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page 6 of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 7 of 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page 7 of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 8 of 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page 8 of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 9 of 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page 9 of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 10 10 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 11 11 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 12 12 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 13 13 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 14 14 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 15 15 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 16 16 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 17 17 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 18 18 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 19 19 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 20 20 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 21 21 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 22 22 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 23 23 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 24 24 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 25 25 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 26 26 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 27 27 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 28 28 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 29 29 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 30 30 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 31 31 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 32 32 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 33 33 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 1 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 34 34 34 34 Document Filed 12/13/2007 Page of of

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 1 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 1 46

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ______________________________________________________________________________ DAVID HUARD, Plaintiff, v. PFIZER, INC., PHARMACIA CORPORATION, G.D. SEARLE LLC, and MONSANTO COMPANY, Defendants. Jury Trial Demanded ______________________________________________________________________________ NOW COME Defendants Pfizer Inc. (improperly captioned in Plaintiff's Complaint as "Pfizer, Inc.") ("Pfizer"), Pharmacia Corporation (f/k/a Monsanto Company1) ("Pharmacia") and G.D. Searle LLC ("Searle") and file this Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint ("Complaint"), and would respectfully show the Court as follows: I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT The Complaint does not state in sufficient detail when Plaintiff was prescribed or used Celebrex® (celocoxib) ("Celebrex®"). Accordingly, this Answer can only be drafted generally. Defendants may seek leave to amend this Answer when discovery reveals the specific time periods in which Plaintiff was prescribed and used Celebrex®. DEFENDANTS PFIZER INC., PHARMACIA CORPORATION, AND G.D. SEARLE LLC'S ORIGINAL ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Case No.: 07-CV-4847 DWF-SRN

Plaintiff's Complaint names "Monsanto Company" as a defendant. Defendants state that in 1933, an entity known as Monsanto Company ("1933 Monsanto") was incorporated under the laws of Delaware. On March 31, 2000, 1933 Monsanto changed its name to Pharmacia Corporation. On February 9, 2000, a separate company, Monsanto Ag Company, was incorporated under the laws of Delaware. On March 31, 2000, Monsanto Ag Company changed its name to Monsanto Company ("2000 Monsanto"). The 2000 Monsanto is engaged in the agricultural business and does not and has not ever designed, produced, manufactured, sold, resold or distributed Celebrex®. Given that Plaintiff alleges in the Complaint that Monsanto Company was involved in distributing Celebrex®, see PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT at ¶ 7, Defendants assume Plaintiff means to refer to 1933 Monsanto. As a result, Pharmacia will respond to the allegations directed at Monsanto Company.

1

-1-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 2 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 2 46

II. ORIGINAL ANSWER Response to Allegations Regarding Parties 1. Defendants admit that Plaintiff brought this civil action seeking monetary damages, but

deny that Plaintiff is entitled to any relief or damages. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations regarding Plaintiff's medical condition and whether Plaintiff used Celebrex®, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct, deny that

Celebrex® caused Plaintiff injury or damage, and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 2. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations regarding Plaintiff's age and citizenship, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 3. Defendants state that this paragraph of the Complaint contains legal contentions to which

no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed required, Defendants admit that Pfizer, Pharmacia, and Searle do business in the State of Minnesota. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 4. Defendants admit that Pfizer is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of

business in New York, and that it is registered to do business in the State of Minnesota. Defendants admit that Pfizer may be served through its registered agent. Defendants admit that Pharmacia acquired Searle in 2000 and that, as the result of a merger in April 2003, Searle and Pharmacia became subsidiaries of Pfizer. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Pfizer and Pharmacia co-promoted and marketed Celebrex® in the United States, including Minnesota, to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants state that Plaintiff's allegations regarding "predecessors in interest" are vague and ambiguous. Defendants are without

-2-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 3 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 3 46

knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of such allegations, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 5. Defendants admit that Searle is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal

place of business in Illinois. Defendants admit that Pharmacia acquired Searle in 2000 and that, as the result of a merger in April 2003, Searle and Pharmacia became subsidiaries of Pfizer. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Celebrex® was manufactured and packaged for Searle, which developed, tested, marketed, co-promoted and distributed Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 6. Defendants admit that Pharmacia is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of

business in New Jersey. Defendants admit that Pharmacia acquired Searle in 2000 and that, as the result of a merger in April 2003, Searle and Pharmacia became subsidiaries of Pfizer. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Pharmacia marketed and co-promoted Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 7. Defendants admit that in 1933 an entity known as Monsanto Company ("1933

Monsanto") was incorporated under the laws of Delaware. On March 31, 2000, a subsidiary of 1933 Monsanto merged with Pharmacia & Upjohn, Inc, and 1933 Monsanto changed its name to Pharmacia Corporation. On February 9, 2000, a separate company, Monsanto Ag Company, was incorporated under the laws of Delaware. On March 31, 2000, Monsanto Ag Company changed its name to Monsanto Company ("2000 Monsanto"). The 2000 Monsanto is engaged in the agricultural business and does not and has not ever manufactured, marketed, sold, or distributed Celebrex®. The 2000 Monsanto is not and has never been the parent of either Searle or Pharmacia. As the 2000 Monsanto does not and has not ever manufactured, marketed, sold, or distributed Celebrex®, Defendants therefore state that the 2000 Monsanto is not a proper party in -3-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 4 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 4 46

this matter. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. Defendants state that the response to this paragraph of the Complaint regarding Monsanto is incorporated by reference into Defendants' responses to each and every paragraph of the Complaint referring to Monsanto and/or Defendants. 8. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Pfizer and Pharmacia marketed and

co-promoted Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Celebrex® was manufactured and packaged for Searle, which developed, tested, marketed, co-promoted and distributed Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants admit that Pharmacia acquired Searle in 2000 and that, as the result of a merger in April 2003, Searle and Pharmacia became subsidiaries of Pfizer. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 9. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Pfizer and Pharmacia marketed and

co-promoted Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Celebrex® was manufactured and packaged for Searle, which developed, tested, marketed, co-promoted and distributed Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 10. Defendants state that the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint regarding

"predecessors in interest" are vague and ambiguous. Defendants are without knowledge or -4-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 5 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 5 46

information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of such allegations, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 11. Defendants admit that Pfizer, Pharmacia, and Searle do business in the State of

Minnesota. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 12. Defendants admit that Pfizer, Pharmacia, and Searle do business in the State of

Minnesota. Defendants are without knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint regarding the amount in controversy, and, therefore, deny the same. However, Defendants admit that Plaintiff claims the amount in controversy satisfies the jurisdictional amount of this Court. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. Response to Factual Allegations 13. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations regarding Plaintiff's medical condition or whether Plaintiff used Celebrex®, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDAapproved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny that Celebrex® caused Plaintiff injury or damage and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 14. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations regarding whether Plaintiff used Celebrex®, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct, deny that Celebrex® caused Plaintiff injury or damage and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. -5-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 6 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 6 46

15.

Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations regarding whether Plaintiff used Celebrex®, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that, in the ordinary case, Celebrex® was expected to reach users and consumers without substantial change from the time of sale. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 16. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations regarding whether Plaintiff used Celebrex®, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 17. Defendants state that the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint regarding aspirin,

naproxen, and ibuprofen are not directed toward Defendants, and, therefore, no response is required. Defendants admit that Celebrex® is in a class of drugs that are, at times, referred to as being a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory ("NSAID") drugs. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 18. Defendants state that the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint are not directed

towards Defendant and, therefore, no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed required, Defendants state that Plaintiff fails to provide the proper context for the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. Defendants therefore lack sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of such allegations, and, therefore, deny the same. 19. Defendants state that the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint are not directed

towards Defendant and, therefore, no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed required, Defendants state that Plaintiff fails to provide the proper context for the

-6-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 7 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 7 46

allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. Defendants therefore lack sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of such allegations, and, therefore, deny the same. 20. Defendants state that the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint are not directed

towards Defendants and, therefore, no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed required, Defendants state that Plaintiff fails to provide the proper context for the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. Defendants therefore lack sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of such allegations, and, therefore, deny the same. 21. Defendants state that the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint are not directed

towards Defendants and, therefore, no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, Defendants state that, as stated in the FDA-approved labeling for Celebrex®, "[t]he mechanism of action of Celebrex is believed to be due to inhibition of prostaglandin synthesis, primarily via inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2), and at therapeutic concentrations in humans, Celebrex does not inhibit the cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) isoenzyme." Plaintiff fails to provide the proper context for the remaining allegations in this paragraph and Defendants therefore lack sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations and, therefore, deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 22. Defendants state that the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint regarding

"predecessors in interest" are vague and ambiguous. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of such allegations, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that, as stated in the FDA-approved labeling for Celebrex®, "[t]he mechanism of action of Celebrex is believed to be due to inhibition of prostaglandin synthesis, primarily via inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2), and at therapeutic concentrations in humans, Celebrex does not inhibit the cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) isoenzyme." Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times

-7-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 8 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 8 46

adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law.

Defendants deny any

wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 23. Defendants admit that Searle submitted a New Drug Application ("NDA") for Celebrex®

on June 29, 1998. Defendants admit that, on December 31, 1998, the FDA granted approval of Celebrex® for the following indications: (1) for relief of the signs and symptoms of osteoarthritis; and (2) for relief of the signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis in adults. Defendants admit that, on December 23, 1999, the FDA granted approval of Celebrex® to reduce the number of adenomatous colorectal polyps in familial adenomatous polyposis ("FAP") as an adjunct to usual care (e.g. endoscopic surveillance surgery). remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 24. Defendants admit that Celebrex® was launched in February 1999. Defendants admit Defendants deny the

that, during certain periods of time, Pfizer and Pharmacia marketed and co-promoted Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Celebrex® was manufactured and packaged for Searle, which developed, tested, marketed, co-promoted and distributed Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the

potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 25. Defendants state that the referenced article speaks for itself and respectfully refer the

Court to the article for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the article is denied. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint.

-8-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 9 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 9 46

26.

Defendants state that the referenced article speaks for itself and respectfully refer the

Court to the article for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the article is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 27. Defendants state that the referenced FDA Update speaks for itself and respectfully refer

the Court to the FDA Update for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the FDA Update is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 28. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 29. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 30. Defendants admit that a supplemental NDA for Celebrex® was submitted to the FDA on

June 12, 2000. Defendants assert that the submission speaks for itself and any attempt to characterize it is denied. Defendants admit that a Medical Officer Review dated September 20, 2000, was completed by the FDA. Defendants state that the referenced study speaks for itself and respectfully refer the Court to the study for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the study is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint.

-9-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 10 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 10 46

31.

Defendants state that the referenced article speaks for itself and respectfully refer the

Court to the article for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the article is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 32. Defendants state that the referenced study speaks for itself and respectfully refer the

Court to the study for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the study is denied. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 33. Defendants state that the referenced Medical Officer Review speaks for itself and

respectfully refer the Court to the Medical Officer Review for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the Medical Officer Review is denied. Defendants state that the

referenced study speaks for itself and respectfully refer the Court to the study for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the study is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 34. Defendants state that the transcripts of the FDA Arthritis Drugs Advisory Committee

hearings speak for themselves and respectfully refer the Court to the transcripts for their actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the transcripts is denied. Defendants state that the referenced study speaks for itself and respectfully refer the Court to the study for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the study is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 35. Defendants state that the referenced articles speak for themselves and respectfully refer

the Court to the articles for their actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the articles is denied. Defendants state that the referenced study speaks for itself and respectfully refer the Court to the study for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the study is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 36. Defendants state that the referenced article speaks for itself and respectfully refer the

Court to the article for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the article is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. -10-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 11 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 11 46

37.

Defendants state that the referenced articles speak for themselves and respectfully refer

the Court to the articles for their actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the articles is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 38. Defendants state that the referenced article speaks for itself and respectfully refer the

Court to the article for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the article is denied. Defendants state that the referenced study speaks for itself and respectfully refer the Court to the study for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the study is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 39. Defendants state that the referenced Medical Officer Review speaks for itself and

respectfully refer the Court to the Medical Officer Review for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the Medical Officer Review is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 40. Plaintiff fails to provide the proper context for the allegations concerning "Public

Citizen" in this paragraph of the Complaint. Defendants therefore lack sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of such allegations, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 41. Defendants state that the referenced article speaks for itself and respectfully refer the

Court to the article for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the article is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 42. Defendants state that the referenced study speaks for itself and respectfully refer the

Court to the study for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the study is denied. Plaintiff fails to provide the proper context for the allegations concerning "Public Citizen" in this paragraph of the Complaint. Defendants therefore lack sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of such allegations, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 43. Defendants admit that there was a clinical trial called APC. Defendants state that the

referenced article speaks for itself and respectfully refer the Court to the article for its actual -11-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 12 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 12 46

language and text. Any attempt to characterize the article is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 44. Defendants state that the referenced article speaks for itself and respectfully refer the

Court to the article for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the article is denied. Plaintiff fails to provide the proper context for the allegations concerning "Data Safety Monitoring Board" in this paragraph of the Complaint. Defendants therefore lack sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of such allegations, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 45. Defendants state that the referenced article speaks for itself and respectfully refer the

Court to the article for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the article is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 46. Defendants state that the referenced Alert for Healthcare Professionals speaks for itself

and respectfully refer the Court to the Alert for Healthcare Professionals for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the Alert for Healthcare Professionals is denied.

Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 47. Defendants state that the referenced Medical Officer Review speaks for itself and

respectfully refer the Court to the Medical Officer Review for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the Medical Officer Review is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 48. Defendants admit that there was a clinical trial called PreSAP. Plaintiff fails to provide

the proper context for the allegations concerning "other Celebrex trials" contained in this paragraph of the Complaint. Defendants therefore lack sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of such allegations, and, therefore, deny the same. As for the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint regarding the PreSAP study, Defendants state that the referenced study speaks for itself and respectfully refer the Court to the study for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the study is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. -12-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 13 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 13 46

49.

Defendants state that the referenced article speaks for itself and respectfully refer the

Court to the article for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the article is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 50. Plaintiff fails to provide the proper context for the allegations regarding Merck and

Vioxx® in this paragraph of the Complaint. Defendants therefore lack sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of such allegations, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that the referenced studies speak for themselves and respectfully refer the Court to the studies for their actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the studies is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 51. Defendants state that the referenced Medical Officer Review speaks for itself and

respectfully refer the Court to the Medical Officer Review for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the Medical Officer Review is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 52. Defendants state that allegations regarding Vioxx® in this paragraph of the Complaint

are not directed toward Defendants, and, therefore no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed required, Plaintiff fails to provide the proper context for the allegations regarding Vioxx® in this paragraph of the Complaint. Defendants therefore lack sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of such allegations, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that the referenced study speaks for itself and respectfully refer the Court to the study for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the study is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 53. Defendants state that allegations regarding Merck and Vioxx® in this paragraph of the

Complaint are not directed toward Defendants, and, therefore no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed required, Plaintiff fails to provide the proper context for the allegations regarding Merck and Vioxx® in this paragraph of the Complaint. Defendants

therefore lack sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of such allegations, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that the referenced study speaks for -13-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 14 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 14 46

itself and respectfully refer the Court to the study for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the study is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 54. Defendants state that allegations regarding Merck and Vioxx® in this paragraph of the

Complaint are not directed toward Defendants, and, therefore no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed required, Plaintiff fails to provide the proper context for the allegations regarding Merck and Vioxx® in this paragraph of the Complaint. Defendants

therefore lack sufficient information or knowledge to form a belief as to the truth of such allegations, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that the referenced study speaks for itself and respectfully refer the Court to the study for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the study is denied. Defendants state that the referenced article speaks for itself and respectfully refer the Court to the article for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the article is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 55. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance Defendants deny the allegations in this

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. paragraph of the Complaint. 56.

Defendants state that the referenced article speaks for itself and respectfully refer the

Court to the article for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the article is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 57. Defendants state that allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint are not directed

toward Defendants, and, therefore no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed required, Defendants state that the referenced article speaks for itself and respectfully refer the Court to the article for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the article is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 58. Defendants deny the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint.

-14-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 15 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 15 46

59.

Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct, deny that Celebrex® is defective, and deny the remaining allegations contained in this paragraph of the Complaint. 60. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the allegations contained in this

paragraph of the Complaint. 61. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the allegations contained in this

paragraph of the Complaint. 62. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations contained in this paragraph of the Complaint. 63. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations regarding whether Plaintiff used Celebrex®, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct, deny that Celebrex® is unreasonably dangerous, and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 64. Defendants admit that the FDA Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising, and

Communications ("DDMAC") sent letters to Searle dated October 6, 1999, April 6, 2000, and November 14, 2000. Defendants state that the referenced letters speak for themselves and -15-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 16 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 16 46

respectfully refer the Court to the letters for their actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the letters is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 65. Defendants admit that the DDMAC sent a letter to Pharmacia dated February 1, 2001.

Defendants state that the referenced letter speaks for itself and respectfully refer the Court to the letter for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the letter is denied.

Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 66. Defendants state that the referenced article speaks for itself and respectfully refer the

Court to the article for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the article is denied. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 67. Defendants admit that the DDMAC sent a letter to Pfizer dated January 10, 2005.

Defendants state that the referenced letter speaks for itself and respectfully refer the Court to the letter for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the letter is denied.

Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 68. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Pfizer and Pharmacia marketed and copromoted Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Celebrex® was manufactured and packaged for Searle, which developed, tested, marketed, co-promoted and distributed Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint.

-16-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 17 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 17 46

69.

Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Pfizer and Pharmacia marketed and copromoted Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Celebrex® was manufactured and packaged for Searle, which developed, tested, marketed, co-promoted and distributed Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants state that Celebrex® is a prescription medication which is approved by the FDA for the following indications: (1) for relief of the signs and symptoms of osteoarthritis; (2) for relief of the signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis in adults; (3) for the management of acute pain in adults; (4) for the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea; (5) to reduce the number of adenomatous colorectal polyps in familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) as an adjunct to usual care (e.g., endoscopic surveillance surgery); (6) for relief of signs and symptoms of ankylosing spondylitis; and (7) for relief of the signs and symptoms of juvenile rheumatoid arthritis in patients two years of age and older. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 70. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which at all times was adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants state that Plaintiff's allegations regarding "predecessors in interest" are vague and ambiguous. Defendants are without knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of

-17-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 18 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 18 46

such allegations, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct, deny that Celebrex® is defective, and deny the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 71. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Pfizer and Pharmacia marketed and copromoted Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Celebrex® was manufactured and packaged for Searle, which developed, tested, marketed, co-promoted and distributed Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 72. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which at all times was adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Pfizer and Pharmacia marketed and copromoted Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Celebrex® was manufactured and packaged for Searle, which developed, tested, marketed, co-promoted and distributed Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint.

-18-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 19 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 19 46

73.

Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 74. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 75. 76. Defendants deny the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 77. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 78. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations regarding whether Plaintiff used Celebrex®, and, therefore, deny the -19-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 20 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 20 46

same. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct, deny that Celebrex® caused Plaintiff injury or damage, and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 79. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct, deny that Celebrex® is defective, and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 80. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® are and were adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 81. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® are and were adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants state that the referenced study speaks for itself and respectfully refer the Court to the study for its actual language and text. Any attempt to characterize the study is denied.

Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 82. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this

paragraph of the Complaint. 83. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations regarding whether Plaintiff used Celebrex®, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance -20-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 21 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 21 46

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® are and were adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. Response to First Cause of Action: Negligence 84. Defendants incorporate by reference their responses to each paragraph of Plaintiff's

Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 85. Defendants state that this paragraph of the Complaint contains legal contentions to which

no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed required, Defendants admit that they had duties as are imposed by law but denies having breached such duties. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any

wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 86. Defendants state that this paragraph of the Complaint contains legal contentions to which

no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed required, Defendants admit that they had duties as are imposed by law but denies having breached such duties. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any

wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 87. Defendants state that this paragraph of the Complaint contains legal contentions to which

no response is required. To the extent that a response is deemed required, Defendants admit that they had duties as are imposed by law but denies having breached such duties. Defendants are -21-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 22 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 22 46

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint regarding whether Plaintiff used Celebrex®, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in

accordance with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint, including all subparts. 88. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint regarding whether Plaintiff used Celebrex®, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDAapproved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 89. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 90. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint regarding whether Plaintiff used Celebrex®, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-22-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 23 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 23 46

approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 91. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint regarding Plaintiff's medical condition or whether Plaintiff used Celebrex®, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct, deny that Celebrex® caused Plaintiff injury or damage, and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 92. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct, deny that Celebrex® caused Plaintiff injury or

damage, and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. Answering the unnumbered paragraph following Paragraph 92 of the Complaint, Defendants deny any wrongful conduct, deny that Celebrex® caused Plaintiff injury or damage, and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. Response to Second Cause of Action: Strict Liability 93. Defendants incorporate by reference their responses to each paragraph of Plaintiff's

Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 94. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint regarding whether Plaintiff used Celebrex®, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Pfizer and Pharmacia marketed and co-promoted Celebrex® in the United States, including Tennessee and California, to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants admit that, during certain periods of time, Celebrex® was manufactured and packaged for Searle, which developed, tested, marketed, co-promoted and distributed Celebrex® in the United States to be prescribed by healthcare providers who are by law authorized to prescribe drugs in accordance with their approval by the FDA. Defendants state that, in the ordinary case, Celebrex® was expected to

-23-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 24 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 24 46

reach users and consumers without substantial change from the time of sale. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 95. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 96. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny that Celebrex® is defective or unreasonably dangerous and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 97. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny that Celebrex® is defective or unreasonably dangerous and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 98. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct, deny that Celebrex® is defective, and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 99. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of -24-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 25 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 25 46

Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct, deny that Celebrex® is defective, and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 100. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint regarding whether Plaintiff used Celebrex®, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDAapproved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct, deny that

Celebrex® is defective, deny that Celebrex® caused Plaintiff injury or damage, and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 101. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 102. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint regarding whether Plaintiff used Celebrex®, and, therefore, deny the same. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDAapproved prescribing information, which was at all times adequate and comported with applicable standards of care and law. Defendants deny any wrongful conduct, deny that

-25-

Case 3:08-cv-00796-CRB Document 1-2 Case 0:07-cv-04847-DWF-SRN Document 4 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 26 ofof 46 Filed 01/18/2008 Page 26 46

Celebrex® caused Plaintiff injury or damage, and deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph of the Complaint. 103. Defendants state that Celebrex® was and is safe and effective when used in accordance

with its FDA-approved prescribing information. Defendants state that the potential effects of Celebrex® were and are adequately described in its FDA-approved