In April 2018, the court dismissed Woodhams from the suit, holding that Pfizer was not "at home" in Illinois and that, under Bristol-Myers, Woodhams had failed to show that specific jurisdiction existed over Pfizer as it relates to Woodhams' claims. In so doing, the court rejected Woodhams' argument that " Bristol-Myers does not apply here because it involved a state court mass tort suit, not a federal putative class action." Haj v. Pfizer Inc., No. 17 C 6730, 2018 WL 1784126, at *6 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 13, 2018) (explaining "[t]hat distinction makes no difference").