Berg v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.

Filing 8

MDL ORDER. CASE TRANSFERRED to District of Maryland. CASE CLOSED.(Donati, J)

Download PDF
Case MDL No. 2775 Document 90 Filed 04/17/17 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL on MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION FILED Apr 17, 2017 CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA IN RE: SMITH & NEPHEW BIRMINGHAM HIP RESURFACING (BHR) HIP IMPLANT PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION MDL No. 2775 (SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE) CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO 1) On April 5, 2017, the Panel transferred 21 civil action(s) to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407. See _F.Supp.3d_ (J.P.M.L. 2017). Since that time, no additional action(s) have been transferred to the District of Maryland. With the consent of that court, all such actions have been assigned to the Honorable Catherine C. Blake. 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 District of Maryland and assigned to Judge Blake. 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 District of Maryland for the reasons stated in the order of April 5, 2017, and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Catherine C. Blake. This order does not become effective until it is filed in the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. 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: Apr 17, 2017 Jeffery N. Lüthi Clerk of the Panel April 17, 2017 I hereby attest and certify on ________________ that the foregoing document is a fu copy of the originals on file in my office and in my legal custody. FELICIA C. CANNON CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MARYLAND By Deputy Case MDL No. 2775 Document 90 Filed 04/17/17 Page 2 of 3 IN RE: SMITH & NEPHEW BIRMINGHAM HIP RESURFACING (BHR) HIP IMPLANT PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION SCHEDULE CTO 1 DIST DIV. MDL No. 2775 TAG ALONG ACTIONS C.A.NO. CASE CAPTION 17 00106 Walker v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. ALABAMA MIDDLE ALM 2 CCB-17-1036 ALABAMA NORTHERN ALN 4 17 00243 Cleveland v. Smith & Nephew Inc CCB-17- 1037 CALIFORNIA EASTERN CAE 2 17 00284 Berg v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. CCB-17-1038 CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN CAS 3 17 00416 Graham v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. CCB-17-1039 1 17 00334 Viner v. Smith & Nephew Inc. CCB-17-1040 1 16 00712 Bertroch v. Smith & Nephew CCB-17-1041 17 01126 Barksdale et al v. Smith & Nephew Inc CCB-17-1042 17 06015 Morgan v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. CCB-17-1043 COLORADO CO DELAWARE DE ILLINOIS CENTRAL ILC 1 MISSOURI WESTERN MOW 5 NEW YORK NORTHERN NYN 1 17 00164 NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN Betters v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. CCB-17-1044 Case MDL No. 2775 Document 90 Filed 04/17/17 Page 3 of 3 NCE 7 17 00035 Tatosian et al v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. 17 00081 Bogk v Smith & Nephew, Inc. CCB-17-1046 CCB-17-1045 TEXAS SOUTHERN TXS 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?