1:84-F-00591•IN RE: Datapoint Corporation Distributorship LItigation
IN RE: Datapoint Corporation Distributorship LItigation
1:84-F-00591Jpml01.06.2015
Gesamter Gesetzestext
Case MDL No. 591 Document 2 Filed 06/01/15 Page 1 of 2 HAL Bi EB gtr TR TRRT LITRARG ® 1A1:DOCKET NO. 591 MAY 22 1364 —e en DHEA BEFORE THE JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGARROR Ge St bi IN RE DATAPOINT CORPORATION DISTRIBUTORSHIP LITIGATION ORDER DENYING TRANSFER#* This litigation consists of one action pending in the Central District of California and one action pending in the Western District of Texas. Presently before the Panel is a motion by the defendant in both actions to transfer, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1407, the actions to an appropriate district for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. Plaintiffs in both the California and Texas actions oppose transfer. On the basis of the papers filed and the hearing held, we find that Section 1407 transfer would neither serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses nor further the just and efficient conduct of the litigation. Although we recognize that the actions in this litigation may involve some common questions of fact, given the minimal number of actions before us, we are not persuaded that these factual questions are so complex, or the accompanying discovery so time-consuming, to warrant transfer. See In re Scotch Whiske ® Antitrust Litigation, 299 F.Supp. 543, 584 (J.P.M.L. 1969). Further- more we point out that suitable alternatives to transfer exist in order to minimize the possibility of duplicative discovery and/or conflicting pretrial rulings. See, e.g., In re Eli Lilly and Compan (Cephalexin Monohydrate) Patent Litigation, 446 F.Supp. 2042, 24% (7.P.M.L. 1978). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1407 to centralize the actions listed on the attached Schedule A be, and the same hereby 1s, DENIED. FOR THE PANEL: Andrew A. Caffrey :Chairman ¥ Judge Milton Pollack recused himself and took no part in the decision of this matter. In addition, Judges Robert H. Schnacke and ® Sam C. Pointer, Jr. took no part in the decision of this matter.
Case MDL No. 591 Document 2 Filed 06/01/15 Page 2 of 2 Schedule A MDL-591 -- In re Datapoint Corporation Distributorship Litigation Central District of California TRW, Inc. v. SAIT Electronics S.A., C.A. No. 83-1899-CBM-JRX Western District of Texas Datapoint DISC, Inc. v. SAIT Electronics S.A., C.A. No. SA-83-CA-T750
Was bedeutet dieser Text für Ihre Situation?
Kostenlose und unverbindliche Beratung
Schildern Sie uns Ihre Situation. Unser Team meldet sich per E-Mail bei Ihnen für Ihre Beratung.
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.