Gale et al v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Filing 15

CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO-280) by MDL Panel TRANSFERRING CASE to the Southern District New York. (slhS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/13/2014) [Transferred from California Northern on 1/28/2014.]

Download PDF
Case MDL No. 2434 Document 431 Filed 01/06/14 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL on MUL TIDISTRICT LITIGATION IN RE: MIRENA IUD PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION MDL No. 2434 (SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE) CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO -28) On April 8, 2013, the Panel transferred 7 civil action(s) to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407. See 938 F.Supp.2d 1355 (J.P.M.L. 2013). Since that time, 306 additional action(s) have been transferred to the Southern District ofNew York. With the consent ofthat court, all such actions have been assigned to the Honorable Cathy Seibel. 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 Southern District of New York and assigned to Judge Seibel. Pursuant to Rule 7.1 of the Rules of Procedure of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Liti!lation, the action(s) on the attached schedule are transferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to the Southern District of New York for the reasons stated in the order of April 8, 2013, and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Cathy Seibel. This order does not become effective until it is filed in the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. 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. Inasmuch as no objection is pending at this time, the stay is lifted. Jan 06, 2014 CLERK'S OFFICE UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION FOR THE PANEL: #7-&4? Jeffery N. LUthi Clerk of the Panel Case MDL No. 2434 Document 431 Filed 01/06/14 Page 2 of 3 IN RE: MIRENA IUD PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION MDL No. 2434 SCHEDULE CT0-28- TAG-ALONG ACTIONS C.A.NO. CASE CAPTION 13-02343 Ferguson v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Incorporated et al ARIZONA AZ 4 CALIFORNIA CENTRAL CAC 2 13-08104 Hailee Paxton et al v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc et al CALIFORNIA EASTERN CAE 2 13-02471 Bacque-Alexander v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc. CALIFORNIA NORTHERN CAN 3 13-04356 Gale et al v. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. ILLINOIS NORTHERN ILN 1 13-08896 13-09052 ILN Pearson v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al Jones v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al KENTUCKY EASTERN KYE 5 13-00436 Middleton v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc. MISSOURI WESTERN MOW 4 13-01201 Volz v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc JESSEE v. BAYER HEALTHCARE NEW JERSEY NJ 2 13-04795 NJ 2 13-04912 PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. Case MDL No. 2434 Document 431 NJ 2 13-05207 NJ 2 13-05608 NJ 2 13-06218 NJ 2 13-06430 NJ 2 13-06440 NJ 2 13-06598 NJ 2 13-07262 NJ 2 13-07347 NJ 2 13-07669 Filed 01/06/14 Page 3 of 3 LEWIS v. BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. MAUGHAN v. BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. SIMMONS v. BAYERHEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. ODOM v. BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. BOOG v. BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. HAYES v. BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. DAVIS v. BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. COLON v. BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. HOSPODARSKY v. BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. et al BURRUS v. BAYERHEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. et al OKLAHOMA NORTHERN OKN 4 13-00778 Mahmood v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc. WASHINGTON WESTERN WAW 2 13-02170 Fife v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc.

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?