Pursuant to Florida law, the plaintiff must be in privity of contract to recover under theories of breach of express or implied warranties. T.W.M. v. Am. Med. Sys., Inc., 886 F. Supp. 842, 844 (N.D. Fla. 1995) (citing Kramer v. Piper Aircraft Corp., 520 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 1988); West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., 336 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 1976)); see also Weiss v. Johansen, 898 So. 2d 1009, 1011 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (stating that "in order to recover for the breach of a warranty either express or implied, the plaintiff must be in privity of contract with the defendant"). "A plaintiff who purchases a product, but does not buy it directly from the defendant, is not in privity with that defendant."

Amoroso, 604 So. 2d at 833 (explaining that "in [Kramer] the [Florida] [S]upreme [C]ourt held that a no-privity claim for breach of implied warranty was abolished by the adoption of strict liability in Florida in [West]" and therefore privity is a requirement for a breach of implied warranty claim); Cooper v. Old Williamsburg Candle Corp., 653 F. Supp. 2d 1220, 1225 (M.D. Fla. 2009) ("To sustain a claim for breach of implied warranty under Florida law, the plaintiff must demonstrate that [s]he is in privity with the defendant." (citing T.W.M. v. Am. Med. Sys., Inc., 886 F. Supp. 842, 844 (N.D. Fla. 1995) (citing Kramer, 520 So. 2d at 39))).

Defendants cite several Florida cases dismissing breach-of-warranty claims pursued against drug or medical device manufacturers due to a lack of privity. (See Reply 4 (citing T.W.M. v. Am. Med. Sys., Inc. , 886 F. Supp. 842, 844 (N.D. Fla. 1995) (dismissing breach of warranty claim for lack of privity); Witt v. Howmedica Osteonics Corp. , No. 13-cv-20742, 2013 WL 6858395, at *3 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 30, 2013) (same); and Fields v. Mylan Pharm., Inc. , 751 F. Supp. 2d 1257, 1259 (N.D. Fla. 2009) (same))). These authorities are inapposite; unlike Plaintiff, the plaintiffs in these cases did not allege they were third-party beneficiaries of the manufacturers’ warranties.

Id. See also, T.W.M. v. American Medical Systems, Inc., 886 F. Supp. 842 (N.D. Fla. 1995); Barrow v. Bristol-Myers Squibb, 1998 WL 812318 (M.D.Fla. 1998). "A warranty, whether express or implied, is fundamentally a contract.