County of Santa Cruz, California v. Purdue Pharma L.P. et al

Filing 13

CONDITION TRANSFER ORDER (CTO-34) from the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. Pursuant to 28 USC 1407, civil case County of Santa Cruz, California v. Purdue Pharma L.P. et al 5:18-cv-2803 is transferred to the Northern District of Ohio to be part of MDL 2804. (dhmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/6/2018)

UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL
on
MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

IN RE: NATIONAL PRESCRIPTION OPIATE
LITIGATION

MDL No. 2804

(SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE)

CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO 34)

On December 5, 2017, the Panel transferred 62 civil action(s) to the United States District Court for
the Northern District of Ohio for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1407. See 290 F.Supp.3d 1375 (J.P.M.L. 2017). Since that time, 637 additional action(s)
have been transferred to the Northern District of Ohio. With the consent of that court, all such
actions have been assigned to the Honorable Dan A. Polster.
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 Ohio and assigned to Judge
Polster.
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 Ohio for the reasons stated in the order of December 5, 2017, and, with the
consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Dan A. Polster.
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 Ohio. 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:

Jun 04, 2018

I hereby certify that this instrument is a true and correct copy of
the original on file in my office. Attest: Sandy Opacich, Clerk
U.S. District Court
Northern District of Ohio
By: /s/Robert Pitts
Deputy Clerk

Jeffery N. Lüthi
Clerk of the Panel

IN RE: NATIONAL PRESCRIPTION OPIATE
LITIGATION

SCHEDULE CTO 34

DIST

DIV.

MDL No. 2804

TAG ALONG ACTIONS

C.A.NO.

CASE CAPTION

18 00225

Dallas County, Alabama v. Actavis, LLC et al

ALABAMA SOUTHERN
ALS

2

CALIFORNIA NORTHERN
CAN

5

18 02803

County of Santa Cruz, California v. Purdue Pharma L.P.
et al

18 21920

The City of Miami v. Purdue Pharma L.P. et al

FLORIDA SOUTHERN
FLS

1

INDIANA SOUTHERN
INS

4

18 00081

INS

4

18 00082

TOWN OF BROWNSTOWN, INDIANA v.
AMERISOURCEBERGEN DRUG CORPORATION et
al
CITY OF SEYMOUR, INDIANA v.
AMERISOURCEBERGEN DRUG CORPORATION et
al

NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN
NCE

2

18 00019

NCE

4

18 00090

NCE

7

18 00081

Dare County v. AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation
et al
Craven County v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
Corporation et al
City of Wilmington v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
Corporation et al

NORTH CAROLINA MIDDLE
NCM

1

OHIO SOUTHERN

18 00416

CITY OF WINSTON SALEM v.
AMERISOURCEBERGEN DRUG CORPORATION et
al

OHS

2

18 00466

OHS

3

18 00164

Knox County Board of County Commissioners v.
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation et al
Shelby County Board of County Commissioners v.
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation et al

WEST VIRGINIA SOUTHERN
WVS

1

18 00930

The City of Bluefield, West Virginia v.
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation et al