Weber v. Mentor Corporation et al

Filing 28

ORDER granting 27 Motion for Suggestion of Remand. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE CLAY D LAND on 12/22/2015. (CGC)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA COLUMBUS DIVISION IN RE MENTOR OBTAPE * TRANSOBTURATOR SLING PRODUCTS * LIABILITY LITIGATION MDL Docket No. 2004 4:08-MD-2004 (CDL) * CASE NO. 4:14-CV-198 (Weber) O R D E R Presently pending before the Court is Defendant Mentor Worldwide LLC’s Motion for Suggestion of Remand to the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota (ECF No. 27 in 4:14-cv-198). As discussed below, the motion is granted. Plaintiff Glenda Weber alleged in her Complaint that she sustained injuries caused by Mentor’s suburethral sling product, ObTape Transobturator Tape, which multidistrict litigation proceeding. No. 1-1 in 4:14-cv-198 transobturator Litigation sling”). transferred (alleging The is issue in this Compl. ¶¶ 1, 16, 19, ECF injuries Judicial Weber’s at case caused Panel to on this by “ObTape Multidistrict Court. See Conditional Transfer Order No. 111, ECF No. 3 in 4:14-cv-198. During discovery, however, the parties learned that Weber was not implanted with ObTape but with a different Given that this case does not involve ObTape, it product. does not “involve questions of fact that are common to the actions” that are part of this multidistrict litigation proceeding. Conditional Transfer Order No. 111. Therefore, the Court grants Mentor’s motion for a suggestion of remand so that the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation may enter an order transferring this case back to the transferor court, the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 22nd day of December, 2015. S/Clay D. Land CLAY D. LAND CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA 2

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?