TracFone Wireless, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corporation et al

Filing 185

ORDER SUGGESTING REMAND TO TRANSFEROR COURTS (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 2/24/2015)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

IN RE: TFT-LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST
LITIGATION
/

No. M 07-1827 SI
MDL. No. 1827

This Order Relates to:

ORDER SUGGESTING REMAND TO
TRANSFEROR COURTS

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

The AASI Creditor Liquidating Trust, by and
through Kenneth A. Welt, Liquidating Trustee v.
AU Optronics, et al., Case No. 3:11-cv-5781 SI
CompuCom Systems, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp.,
et al., Case No. 3:11-cv-6241 SI
Interbond Corp. of America v. AU Optronics
Corp., et al., Case No. 3:11-cv-3763 SI
MetroPCS Wireless, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp.,
et al., Case No. 3:11-cv-829 SI
Office Depot, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp., et al.,
Case No. 3:11-cv-2225 SI
Tech Data Corp., et al. v. AU Optronics Corp., et
al., Case No. 3:11-cv-5765 SI
Tracfone Wireless, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp., et
al., Case No. 3:10-cv-3205 SI
/

25
26

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) transferred to this Court for coordinated

27

pretrial proceedings numerous antitrust actions relating to an alleged conspiracy to fix the prices for thin

28

film transistor-liquid crystal display (TFT-LCD) panels, which are used in computer monitors, flat panel

1

television sets, and other electronic devices. The above-captioned actions were among the cases

2

transferred to this Court pursuant to the JPML’s April 20, 2007 transfer order and this Court’s July 3,

3

2007 related case pretrial order #1.

4
5
6

Title 28 U.S.C. § 1407(a), pursuant to which these cases were transferred here, provides in
relevant part:

7

When civil actions involving one or more common questions of fact are pending
in different districts, such actions may be transferred to any district for
coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. Such transfers shall be made by
the judicial panel on multidistrict litigation ... upon its determination that transfers
for such proceedings will be for the convenience of parties and witnesses and will
promote the just and efficient conduct of such actions. Each action so transferred
shall be remanded by the panel at or before the conclusion of such pretrial
proceedings to the district from which it was transferred unless it shall have been
previously terminated.

8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12

(emphasis added). Once “coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings” have been completed in the

13

transferee court, the transferred cases must be remanded to their original courts (whether for trial or

14

otherwise). Lexecon Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, 523 U.S. 26, 28 (1998). The

15

authority to do so, however, rests entirely with the JPML; this Court lacks the power to remand an action

16

transferred to it under Section 1407. See id. (noting § 1407(a) “imposes a duty on the Panel to remand

17

any such action to the original district ‘at or before the conclusion of such pretrial proceedings’”). The

18

transferee judge may recommend remand of an action to the transferor court by filing a suggestion of

19

remand with the Panel. See Panel Rule 10.1(b)(i).

20
21

The Court concludes that the purposes behind consolidating these related actions in this Court

22

have now been served. The Court has addressed numerous discovery disputes, dispositive motions, and

23

other pretrial issues involving facts and legal questions common to the various cases in this MDL

24

proceeding. No further pretrial motions raising common questions are pending in these cases, and

25

remand to the transferor courts appears to be in the interest of judicial efficiency.

26
27

///

28

///
2

1

Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 10.1(b)(I) of the Rules of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict

2

Litigation, the Court SUGGESTS that the Panel REMAND the following cases to their transferor courts:

3

The AASI Creditor Liquidating Trust, by and through Kenneth A. Welt, Liquidating Trustee v.

4

AU Optronics, et al., Case No. 3:11-cv-5781 SI
CompuCom Systems, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp., et al., Case No. 3:11-cv-6241 SI

6

Interbond Corp. of America v. AU Optronics Corp., et al., Case No. 3:11-cv-3763 SI

7

MetroPCS Wireless, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp., et al., Case No. 3:11-cv-829 SI

8

Office Depot, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp., et al., Case No. 3:11-cv-2225 SI

9

Tech Data Corp., et al. v. AU Optronics Corp., et al., Case No. 3:11-cv-5765 SI

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

5

Tracfone Wireless, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp., et al., Case No. 3:10-cv-3205 SI.

11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14

Dated: February 24, 2015
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3