A.D. et al v. Pfizer, Inc. et al

Filing 38

TRANSFER ORDER by The United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation TRANSFERRING CASE to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, MDL No. 2342. (tnS) (Filed on 10/18/2013)

,•

UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL
on
MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

IN RE: ZOLOFT (SERTRALINE HYDROCHLORIDE)
PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
A.D., et al. v. Pfizer, Inc., et al.,
N.D. California, C.A. No. 3: 13-2466

)
)

MDL No. 2342

TRANSFER ORDER

Before the Panel:* Pursuant to Panel Rule 7.1, plaintiffs move to vacate our order
conditionally transferring this action (A.D.) to MDL No. 2342. Defendant Pfizer, Inc. (Pfizer)
opposes the motion to vacate.
After considering all argument of counsel, we find that this action shares questions of fact
with actions in this litigation previously transferred to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and that
transfer of this action to MDL No. 2342 will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and
promote the just and efficient conduct of this litigation. Plaintiffs do not dispute that this action
shares questions of fact with MDL No. 2342. Like many of the already-centralized actions, A.D.
involves factual questions arising from allegations that plaintiffs' children were born with birth defects
as result of their mothers ingesting Zoloft during pregnancy. See In re: Zoloft (Sertraline
Hydrochloride) Prods. Liab. Litig., 856 F. Supp. 2d 1347 (J.P.M.L. 2012).
In support of their motion to vacate, plaintiffs argue that federal subject matter jurisdiction
is lacking, and plaintiffs' motion to remand to state court is pending. The Panel often has held that
jurisdictional issues do not present an impediment to transfer, as plaintiffs can present such arguments
to the transferee judge. 1 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).

l

fl~UE f:'WV

(.;EK f lflEO

ro rKUM I Ht htl.IU<"

JATED:

IQ - fl-13

\mST:

""---

Judge Sarah S. Vance did not participate in the disposition of this matter.
Moreover, the Northern District of California has stayed the A.D. action and denied
the motion to remand without prejudice.

-2IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, this action is transferred
to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable
Cynthia M. Rufe for inclusion in the coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings occurring there
in this docket.

PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

Chairman
Kathryn H. Vratil
Marjorie 0. Rendell
Lewis A. Kaplan

Paul J. Barbadoro
Charles R. Breyer