Posey v. McKesson Corporation
Filing
12
CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORER (CTO-16) transferring case to the Eastern District of Kentucky. In Re: Darvocet, Darvon and Propoxyphene Products Liability Litigation MDL No. 2226. (Attachments: # 1 CTO-16)(far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/12/2012)
UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL
on
MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION
FILED AND CERTIFIED
ROBERT R. CARR, CLERK
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
Date:
By:
IN RE: DARVOCET, DARVON AND PROPOXYPHENE
PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
6/8/2012
C. Dearborn
Deputy Clerk
MDL No. 2226
TRANSFER ORDER
Before the Panel:* Pursuant to Panel Rule 7.1, plaintiffs in three actions listed on Schedule
A move to vacate our orders that conditionally transferred their respective actions to MDL No. 2226.
Responding defendants Eli Lilly & Co. (Eli Lilly), Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Xanodyne),
Covidien Inc., Mylan Inc., and Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. oppose the motion.
In support of their motion to vacate, plaintiffs argue primarily that federal jurisdiction does
not exist in these cases. Plaintiffs also argue that these actions involve unique factual issues distinct
from the issues in MDL No. 2226. We find these arguments unpersuasive. The Panel has often held
that jurisdictional issues do not present an impediment to transfer, as plaintiffs can present such
arguments to the transferee judge. See, e.g., In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. Sales Practices Litig.,
170 F. Supp. 2d 1346, 1347-48 (J.P.M.L. 2001). Furthermore, while these actions may involve some
unique issues of fact, the majority of claims are virtually identical to claims already pending in the
MDL. Section 1407 does not require a complete identity or even a majority of common factual or
legal issues as a prerequisite to transfer. See, e.g., Gadolinium Contrast Dyes Prods. Liab. Litig.,
536 F. Supp. 2d 1380, 1382 (J.P.M.L. 2008).
After considering all argument of counsel, we find that the actions share questions of fact with
actions in this litigation previously transferred to the Eastern District of Kentucky, and that transfer
of this action to the Eastern District of Kentucky for inclusion in MDL No. 2226 will serve the
convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of this litigation.
Like many of the already-centralized actions, these cases involve factual questions arising from
allegations that Darvocet, Darvon and other medications containing propoxyphene were defectively
designed and marketed and claims that the ingestion of such medications resulted in injury. See In
re Darvocet, Darvon and Propoxyphene Prods. Liab. Litig., 780 F. Supp. 2d 1379, 1380 (J.P.M.L.
2011).
*
Judge Kathryn H. Vratil took no part in the decision of this matter.
-2IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 1407, these actions are
transferred to the Eastern District of Kentucky and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the
Honorable Danny C. Reeves for inclusion in the coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings
occurring there in this docket.
PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION
John G. Heyburn II
Chairman
W. Royal Furgeson, Jr.
Paul J. Barbadoro
Charles R. Breyer
Barbara S. Jones
Marjorie O. Rendell
IN RE: DARVOCET, DARVON AND PROPOXYPHENE
PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
MDL No. 2226
SCHEDULE A
Northern District of California
Henry D. Witthauer, et al. v. McKesson Corp., et al., C.A. No. 3:12-00343
Wendell Rice, et al. v. McKesson Corp., et al., C.A. No. 3:12-00344
Tenessia Posey v. McKesson Corp., et al., C.A. No. 3:12-00346
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?