Meyers v. Watts Regulator Company

Filing 26

ORDER - re 25 Stipulation filed by Kathryn Meyers that this action is to be transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Signed by Judge Gregory L. Frost on 3/24/15. (kn)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
KATHERYN MEYERS, individually
and on behalf of all others
similarly situated,
Plaintiff,
v.
WATTS REGULATOR CO.
Defendant.

: Civil Action No. 2:14-cv-02729
:
:
: District Judge Gregory L. Frost
:
:
:
:
:

STIPULATED ORDER TRANSFERRING THIS
ACTION TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between Plaintiff Katheryn Meyers
(“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Watts Regulator Co. (“Defendant”) (together, the
“Parties”), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) that this action be transferred to the
United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (“Transferee
District”), wherein the Parties agree that they will seek the consolidation of this
action with Ponzo v. Watts Regulator Co., No. 1:14-cv-14080 (D. Mass.), which
was filed prior to this action and asserts allegations that are similar to those
asserted in this action. The Transferee District is the location of the corporate
headquarters of Defendant. The Transferee District is also the location of two
prior pending actions alleged to involve the same product and similar or related

claims, including Ponzo v. Watts Regulator Co., No. 1:14-cv-14080 (D. Mass.),
and Sharp v. Watts Regulator Co., No. 1:14-cv-14385 (D. Mass.).
The parties acknowledge that the Transferee District is a district where the
original action might have been brought because: (a) the Transferee District has
subject matter jurisdiction; (b) venue is proper in the Transferee District; and (c)
Defendant is amenable to process issuing out of the Transferee District. Gosiger,
Inc. v. Elliott Aviation, Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163842, at *4-*5 (S.D. Ohio.
Nov. 18, 2013); Jamhour v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., 211 F. Supp. 2d 941, 945 (S.D.
Ohio 2002); Sky Technology Partners, LLC v. Midwest Research Institute, 125 F.
Supp. 2d 286, 291 (S.D. Ohio 2000).
The parties agree that a transfer is justified “for the convenience of parties
and witnesses and in the interest of justice.” 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). The parties
further agree that transfer will fulfill the purpose of 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) to
“prevent that waste of time, energy and money and to protect litigants, witnesses,
and the public against unnecessary inconvenience and expense.” Van Dusen v.
Barrack, 376 U.S. 612, 616 (1964); see also Gosiger, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
163842, at *4-*5 (S.D. Ohio. Nov. 18, 2013).
The undersigned parties have met and conferred and agree to the transfer
requested above. Moreover, the undersigned parties have also been meeting and
conferring concerning alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”), including mediation,
2

and believe that transferring this matter to the District where Ponzo and Sharp are
pending will also assist in facilitating those ADR discussions.
Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Jack Landskroner
Jack Landskroner (0059227)
[e-mail]
Drew T. Legando (0084209)
[e-mail]
LANDSKRONER GRIECO
MERRIMAN, LLC
1360 West 9th Street, Suite 200
Cleveland, OH 44113
[phone] (T)
[phone] (F)

/s/ Wendy West Feinstein
Wendy West Feinstein (0064973)
[e-mail]
ECKERT SEAMANS CHERIN &
MELLOTT, LLC
600 Grant Street, 44th Floor
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
[phone] (T)
[phone] (F)
Attorneys for Defendant,
Watts Regulator Co.

Attorneys for Plaintiff,
Katheryn Meyers, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated

IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/

Gregory L. Frost

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3