Montes v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.
Filing
7
CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO-84). CASE TRANSFERRED to the Northern District of California. MDL No. 2672. (Robles, S)
Case 3:15-md-02672-CRB Document 2904 Filed 02/13/17 Page 13 3
Case MDL No. 2672 Document 2250 Filed 02/13/17 Page 1 of of
UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL
on
MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION
IN RE: VOLKSWAGEN "CLEAN DIESEL"
MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND
PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
MDL No. 2672
(SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE)
CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO −84)
On December 8, 2015, the Panel transferred 56 civil action(s) to the United States District Court for
the Northern District of California for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1407. See 148 F.Supp.3d 1367 (J.P.M.L. 2015). Since that time, 1,184 additional
action(s) have been transferred to the Northern District of California. With the consent of that court,
all such actions have been assigned to the Honorable Charles R. Breyer.
It appears that the action(s) on this conditional transfer order involve questions of fact that are
common to the actions previously transferred to the Northern District of California and assigned to
Judge Breyer.
Pursuant to Rule 7.1 of the Rules of Procedure of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation, the action(s) on the attached schedule are transferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to the
Northern District of California for the reasons stated in the order of December 8, 2015, and, with the
consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Charles R. Breyer.
This order does not become effective until it is filed in the Office of the Clerk of the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California. The transmittal of this order to said Clerk shall
be stayed 7 days from the entry thereof. If any party files a notice of opposition with the Clerk of the
Panel within this 7−day period, the stay will be continued until further order of the Panel.
Feb 13, 2017
FOR THE PANEL:
Jeffery N. Lüthi
Clerk of the Panel
I hereby certify that the annexed
instrument is a true and correct copy
of the original on file in my office.
ATTEST:
SUSAN Y. SOONG
Clerk, U.S. District Court
Northern District of California
by:
Date:
Deputy Clerk
13 February 2017
Case 3:15-md-02672-CRB Document 2904 Filed 02/13/17 Page 23 3
Case MDL No. 2672 Document 2250 Filed 02/13/17 Page 2 of of
IN RE: VOLKSWAGEN "CLEAN DIESEL"
MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND
PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
MDL No. 2672
SCHEDULE CTO−84 − TAG−ALONG ACTIONS
DIST
DIV.
C.A.NO.
CASE CAPTION
CALIFORNIA CENTRAL
CAC
2
17−00652
CAC
2
17−00701
CAC
2
17−00704
CAC
2
17−00705
CAC
2
17−00769
CAC
2
17−00775
CAC
5
17−00142
CAC
5
17−00144
CAC
5
17−00158
Thomas Heinrich Worring v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc. et al
Lindsey M. Bixler v. Volkswagen Group of America,
Inc., et al
Maureen A. Powers v. Volkswagen Group of America,
Inc. et al
Hermelina R. Schneider v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc. et al
Michael Bear v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc et
al
Dustin Pearlman v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc
et al
John S. McCallum v. Volkswagen Group of America,
Inc., et al
Victoria West v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. et
al
Terry W. Pack v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.,
et al
CALIFORNIA EASTERN
CAE
1
17−00120
CAE
2
17−00214
Montes v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.
Reaves, et al. v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., et
al.
CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN
CAS
CAS
3
3
17−00139
17−00169
Amato v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. et al
Reyes v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. et al
16−02933
STANTON v. VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF
AMERICA, INC.
INDIANA SOUTHERN
INS
1
Case 3:15-md-02672-CRB Document 2904 Filed 02/13/17 Page 33 3
Case MDL No. 2672 Document 2250 Filed 02/13/17 Page 3 of of
MAINE
ME
1
17−00038
STATE OF MAINE v. VOLKSWAGEN AG et al
17−00012
Cantu et al v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. et al
TEXAS SOUTHERN
TXS
1
Opposed 2/8/17
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?