IN RE: AM International, Inc., Securities Litigation

Case MDL No. 494 Document 2 Filed 05/19/15 Page 1 of 3
pee] 2 Pree on | LoSERRE VS
DOCKET NO. 494 HR 1S fro) bio
PATO +o, ) RY oo
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION. 1: a ShettyTEM er HD pes Te :
IN RE AM INTERNATIONAL, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION trl i. po
TRANSFER ORDER%*
This litigation consists of thirteen actions pending - I
in three districts: ten actions in the Southern District SPS
of New York; two actions in the Northern District of Illinois:
and one action in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Co
Presently before the Panel is a motion, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§1407, to centralize all actions in the Northern District
of Illinois for coordinated or consolidated pretrial pro-
ceedings. Also before the Panel is a cross-motion to centralize
all actions in the Central District of California, again
for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.
On the basis of the papers filed and the hearing held,
the Panel finds that these actions involve common questions ’ :
of fact and that centralization of these actions under Section
1407 in the Southern District of New York will best serve ;
the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote :
the just and efficient conduct of the litigation. Common ;
factual questions arise from the allegations in each action
that defendants violated various securities laws by engaging wl
in fraudulent conduct and making false statements of material Co
fact as to the financial and operating condition of AM : : .
International, Inc. Centralization under Section 1407 is :
therefore necessary in order to prevent duplication of =
discovery, avoid inconsistent pretrial rulings, and conserve - Co
the resources of the parties, their counsel, and the judiciary. i
Although we are of the view that any of the suggested
districts could be described as an appropriate transferee EE ERAS
forum for this litigation, on balance we conclude that the : k
Southern District of New York is the most preferable. A
large majority of the actions is pending in the Southern
District of New York, reflecting an overwhelming preference
on the part of plaintiffs for that district. In addition,
defendant Price Waterhouse, who once served as AM International's
accountants and auditors, has established in New York a . .
document depository containing relevant documents that have to
been gathered from offices around the world. Since financial, :
accounting, and auditing documents are likely to play a
* Judges Roy W. Harper and Sam C. Pointer, Jr. took no
part in the decision of this matter.

Case MDL No. 494 Document2 Filed 05/19/15 Page	2 of 3
—2—~
® significant role in this litigation, the centralizationof many such documents in New York enhances the Southern
District of New York as the most appropriate transferee
forum for this litigation.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $1407,
the actions listed on the attached Schedule A and pending
in districts other than the Southern District of New York
be, and the same hereby are, transferred to the Southern
District of New York and, with the consent of that court,
assigned to the Honorable John E. Sprizzo for coordinated
or consolidated pretrial proceedings with the actions pending
in that district and listed on Schedule A.
FOR THE PANEL:
. Andrew A. Caffrey
Chairman

Case MDL No. 494 Document 2 Filed 05/19/15 Page 3 of 3
Schedule A
® MDL=-494 -- In re AM Internationgl, Inc. Securities Litigation
Southern District of New York
Marcus Weisman v. New Court Securities Corp., et al.,
C.A. No. 81 Civ 7124
William A. Kass, et al. v. AM International, Inc.,
et al., C.A. No. 81 Civ 7225
Madison Fund v. New Court Securities Corp., et al.,
C.A. No. 81 Civ 7024
Meta Morrison v. Jean Allard, et al.,
C.A. No. 81 Civ 7532
Robert Hyman v. AM International, Inc., et al.,
C.A. No. 81 Civ 7543
Robert Pollock, et al. v. AM International, Inc., et al.,
C.A. No. 81 Civ 7584 J
Herman Kahan v. AM International, et al.,
C.A. No. 81 Civ 7772
Robert G. Morris v. AM International, et al.,
C.A. No. 81 Civ 7812
Frederick Rand v. Jean Allard,	et al.,
C.A. No. 81 Civ 7281
’ Herbert Silverberg v. AM International, Inc.,.et al.,C.A. No. 81 Civ 8028
Northern District of Illinois
® E.D. Dubowski wv. Roy L. Ash., et al.,	u C.A. No. 81C6229
Robert Blakeney, et al. v. Roy L. Ash, et al.,
C.A. No. 81C6540
Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Martina Rucci, et.al. v. Roy L. Ash, et al.,
C.A. No. 81-5378