Leathers v. United States Litigation Update: The Ad Council Joins Pfizer in Seeking Dismissal of the Complaint–Attacks on Plaintiffs’ Counsel
The Ad Council and Pfizer have teamed up to attack the lawsuit by personally assaulting the professional ability and qualifications of Plaintiffs’ counsel. This is a tactic that has been used on many occasions by the defendants in this litigation against opponents of the Biden Administration’s Universal COVID-19 “Vaccination Policy” –attack the messenger to discredit the message. They attempt to cast Plaintiffs’ counsel in the class of pro se (non-lawyer) litigants by complaining that the Complaint is too long and detailed and has too many footnotes (sources for scientific facts pleaded) for them to understand the basis for their personal liability. In Pfizer’s and the Ad Council’s latest filings, they attempt to attack the Complaint by also attacking Plaintiffs’ Response in Opposition to Pfizer’s Motion to Dismiss. I have argued they mischaracterize this counsel’s arguments–intentionally or through an obvious misreading of our Response–to manufacture evidence of professional incompetence that does not exist. Their obvious strategy here is to characterize Plaintiffs’ counsel as a crackpot lawyer and, in that way, discredit the Complaint.
You will find Pfizer’s and the Ad Council’s latest filings (Pfizer’s Reply to our Response in Opposition to its Motion to Dismiss, the Ad Council’s Notice of Joinder in Pfizer’s Motion to Dismiss and Notice of Joinder in Pfizer’s Reply) and our Response in Opposition to the Ad Council’s Notice of Joinder in Pfizer’s arguments reproduced below. I encourage you to read the documents and make up your own mind.
Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Ad Council's Notice of Joinder in Pfizer Motion to Dismiss_File-Stamped (1)