Neurocare Institute of Central Florida, P.A. v. Healthtap, Inc. et al

Filing 14

ORDER DENYING TRANSFER re: pldg. (9 in FLM/6:13-cv-01228, 10 in ILN/1:13-cv-07522, 13 in MDL No. 2530), ( 1 in MDL No. 2530) The motion to transfer, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1407, is DENIEDSigned by Judge John G. Heyburn II, Chairman, PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION, on 6/9/2014. Associated Cases: MDL No. 2530, FLM/6:13-cv-01228, ILN/1:13-cv-07522 (dld)

UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL
on
MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

IN RE: HEALTHTAP INC. TELEPHONE
CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT (TCPA)
LITIGATION

MDL No. 2530

ORDER DENYING TRANSFER

Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiff in the Northern District of Illinois
action initially moved to centralize this litigation in the Middle District of Florida. Plaintiff in the
Middle District of Florida action supported the motion. Defendants Healthtap, Inc. (HealthTap) and
Jeffrey Pollard, M.D., opposed the motion for centralization or, alternatively, suggested the Northern
District of Illinois as transferee district. This litigation currently consists of two actions listed on
Schedule A and pending in the Middle District of Florida and the Northern District of Illinois. At oral
argument, counsel revealed that a settlement in principal has been reached in one of the actions, and
that plaintiff in the other action may seek to join the settlement. As a result, all parties requested that
the Panel defer ruling on the Section 1407 motion for 90 days pending the outcome of the proposed
settlement.
On the basis of the papers filed and hearing session held, we deny the motion. It appears that
these actions are close to settlement and, therefore, we find that centralization at this time will not
serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses or promote the just and efficient conduct of the
litigation. If the claims do not settle and centralization is otherwise necessary, the parties are free to
move for centralization at that time. See, e.g., In re: Pilot Flying J Fuel Rebate Contract Litig. (No.
II), __ F. Supp. 2d __, 2014 WL 1364754 (J.P.M.L. Apr. 7, 2014).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, the motion for
centralization of these actions is denied.

PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

John G. Heyburn II
Chairman
Marjorie O. Rendell
Lewis A. Kaplan
Ellen Segal Huvelle

Charles R. Breyer
Sarah S. Vance
R. David Proctor

IN RE: HEALTHTAP INC. TELEPHONE
CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT (TCPA)
LITIGATION

MDL No. 2530

SCHEDULE A

Middle District of Florida
NEUROCARE INSTITUTE OF CENTRAL FLORIDA, P.A. v. HEALTHTAP, INC.,
ET AL., C.A. No. 6:13-01228
Northern District of Illinois
FLORENCE MUSSAT, M.D., S.C. v. HEALTHTAP INC., C.A. No. 1:13-07522