Lunsford v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.

Filing 6

CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO-19). CASE TRANSFERRED to District of District of Maryland. MDL No. 2775. (Robles, S)

Case MDL No. 2775 Document 172 Filed 07/17/17 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL
on
MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

IN RE: SMITH & NEPHEW BIRMINGHAM HIP
RESURFACING (BHR) HIP IMPLANT
PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

MDL No. 2775

(SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE)

CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO −19)

On April 5, 2017, the Panel transferred 21 civil action(s) to the United States District Court for the
District of Maryland for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1407. See _F.Supp.3d_ (J.P.M.L. 2017). Since that time, 40 additional action(s) have been
transferred to the District of Maryland. With the consent of that court, all such actions have been
assigned to the Honorable Catherine C. Blake.
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 District of Maryland and assigned to Judge
Blake.
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
District of Maryland for the reasons stated in the order of April 5, 2017, and, with the consent of that
court, assigned to the Honorable Catherine C. Blake.
This order does not become effective until it is filed in the Office of the Clerk of the United States
District Court for the District of Maryland. 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.

FOR THE PANEL:
Jul 17, 2017

Jeffery N. Lüthi
Clerk of the Panel
July 17, 2017
I hereby attest and certify on ________________
that the foregoing document is a full
copy of the originals on file in my office and in my
legal custody.
FELICIA C. CANNON
CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

By

Deputy

Case MDL No. 2775 Document 172 Filed 07/17/17 Page 2 of 2

IN RE: SMITH & NEPHEW BIRMINGHAM HIP
RESURFACING (BHR) HIP IMPLANT
PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

MDL No. 2775

SCHEDULE CTO−19 − TAG−ALONG ACTIONS

DIST

DIV.

C.A.NO.

CASE CAPTION

17−00805

Lunsford v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. CCB-17-1981

CALIFORNIA EASTERN
CAE

1

CALIFORNIA NORTHERN
CAN

3

17−03649

Constantini v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. CCB-17-1982