Case: 09-30445 Document: 00511222421 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/01/2010
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
September 1, 2010
No. 09-30445
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
IN RE: VIOXX PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION.
SERGI CHEPILKO,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
MERCK AND COMPANY, INC.,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 2:05-MD-1657
USDC No. 2:08-CV-959
Case: 09-30445 Document: 00511222421 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/01/2010
No. 09-30445
Before DAVIS, SMITH, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appearing pro se, the plaintiff-appellant, Sergi Chepilko, has filed a three-
page brief. It is difficult to tell what legal claims he makes on appeal. The only
issue stated is “[w]hether District Court correctly dismissed with prejudice all
claims of plaintiff for failure to comply with Pre-Trial Order 28.”
Chepilko asserts that he “did not receive from the District Court numerous
Pre-Trial Orders, including PTO-28 . . . .” He states that “[i]stead, Vioxx claims
Administrator offered plaintiff to enroll in the Settlement Program,” which he
did. He declined to sign the stipulation of dismissal because, as he posits, he
had real concerns that such demand without consideration of the
settlement offer could be fraudulent and addressed this issue to the
court. Nobody explained [to] plaintiff why such stipulation of dis-
missal requires upfront unconditional signing.
Chepilko asserts that being required to sign the stipulation of dismissal,
pursuant to the settlement, is “illegal.” That claim is without merit. Because
he has shown no reversible error, the judgment of dismissal is AFFIRMED.
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .
R. 47.5.4.
2