Rainey v. DePuy Orthopaedics Inc., et al
Filing
8
MDL CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER, CASE TRANSFERRED to Northern District of Texas re: MDL No. 2244; case Number 3:11-md-2244-K. (Waggoner, D)
Case 3:11-md-02244-K 2244 Document Filed 05/15/13 Page 1 of 3 1PageID 4082
Case MDL No. Document 297 1048 Filed 05/15/13 Page of 3
UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL
on
MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION
FILED
May 15, 2013
IN RE: DEPUY ORTHOPAEDICS, INC.,
PINNACLE HIP IMPLANT PRODUCTS
LIABILITY LITIGATION
CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MDL No. 2244
(SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE)
CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO −135)
On May 23, 2011, the Panel transferred 3 civil action(s) to the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §1407. See 787 F.Supp.2d 1358 (J.P.M.L. 2011). Since that time, 907 additional action(s)
have been transferred to the Northern District of Texas. With the consent of that court, all such
actions have been assigned to the Honorable James Edgar Kinkeade.
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 Texas and assigned to
Judge Kinkeade.
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 Texas for the reasons stated in the order of May 23, 2011, and, with the consent
of that court, assigned to the Honorable James Edgar Kinkeade.
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 Texas. 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:
May 15, 2013
Jeffery N. Lüthi
Clerk of the Panel
By s/*PAIGE LESSOR
DEPUTY CLERK
U.S. DISTRICT COURT, NORTHERN
DISTRICT OF TEXAS
May 15, 2013
Case 3:11-md-02244-K 2244 Document Filed 05/15/13 Page 2 of 3 2PageID 4083
Case MDL No. Document 297 1048 Filed 05/15/13 Page of 3
IN RE: DEPUY ORTHOPAEDICS, INC.,
PINNACLE HIP IMPLANT PRODUCTS
LIABILITY LITIGATION
MDL No. 2244
SCHEDULE CTO−135 − TAG−ALONG ACTIONS
DIST
DIV.
C.A.NO.
CASE CAPTION
ALABAMA NORTHERN
ALN
ALN
ALN
ALN
ALN
2
2
2
2
6
13−00653
13−00654
13−00655
13−00656
13−00657
Burnham v. Johnson &Johnson Inc et al
Demarsico v. Johnson &Johnson Inc et al
Nelson v. Johnson &Johnson Inc et al
Wallerich v. Johnson &Johnson Inc et al
Yeager v. Johnson &Johnson Inc et al
2
13−00670
Petersen v. DePuy Orthopaedics Incorporated et al
ARIZONA
AZ
CALIFORNIA CENTRAL
CAC
CAC
2
2
13−02733
13−02754
Robert Severson et al v. DePuy Orthopaedics Inc et al
Wayne Novotny et al v. DePuy Orthopaedics Inc et al
CALIFORNIA EASTERN
CAE
2
13−00774
Rainey v. DePuy Orthopaedics Inc., et al
CALIFORNIA NORTHERN
CAN
3
13−01824
Elson v. Johnson &Johnson Services, Inc. et al
FLORIDA SOUTHERN
FLS
FLS
0
0
13−60884
13−60885
Sloan v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al
McJimsey v. Johnson &Johnson, Inc. et al
INDIANA NORTHERN
INN
3
13−00322
LOUISIANA EASTERN
Duross v. DePuy Orthopaedics Inc et al
Case 3:11-md-02244-K 2244 Document Filed 05/15/13 Page 3 of 3 3PageID 4084
Case MDL No. Document 297 1048 Filed 05/15/13 Page of 3
LAE
2
13−02522
Clark v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al
13−00994
13−00995
13−00996
Schaedel v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al
Watson v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al
Miller v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al
MINNESOTA
MN
MN
MN
0
0
0
MISSISSIPPI NORTHERN
MSN
1
13−00073
Newell v. Depuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al
MISSOURI WESTERN
MOW
2
13−04107
Church v. DePuy Orthopaedics Inc et al
NEW YORK NORTHERN
NYN
1
13−00413
Fick et al v. Johnson &Johnson Services, LLC et al
11−20605
Walsh v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al
OHIO NORTHERN
OHN
1
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?