IN RE: Shell Eggs Antitrust Litigation

UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL
on
MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION
IN RE: SHELL EGGS
ANTITRUST LITIGATION 	MDL No. 3175
TRANSFER ORDER
Before the Panel:* Plaintiff in the Southern District of Indiana King Kullen action moves
under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to centralize this litigation in the Southern District of Indiana. 	This
litigation consists of six actions pending in three districts, as listed on Schedule A. 	The parties
have notified the Panel of seven related actions pending in four districts.1 All responding parties
agree that centralization is appropriate but differ as to the proposed transferee district. Plaintiffs
in six potential tag-along actions and responding defendants2 support centralization in the Southern
District of Indiana, in the first instance or in the alternative. Plaintiffs in six actions and potential
tag-along actions support centralization in the Western District of Wisconsin, in the first instance
or in the alternative. Plaintiffs in five actions and potential tag-along actions support centralization
in the Northern District of Illinois, in the first instance or in the alternative. 	One potential tag-
along action plaintiff alternatively would not oppose centralization in the Western District of
Missouri.
On the basis of the papers filed and the hearing session held, we find that these actions
involve common questions of fact and that centralization in the Western District of Wisconsin will
serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of
this litigation. All responding parties agree that these actions share factual questions arising from
allegations that defendants conspired to fix, raise, maintain, and stabilize the price of shell eggs in
* 	Judge Karen K. Caldwell, Judge Matthew F. Kennelly, and Judge David C. Norton took
no part in the decision of this matter. Additionally, one or more Panel members who could be
members of the putative classes in this litigation have renounced their participation in these classes
and participated in this decision.
1 	These and any other related actions are potential tag-along actions. See Panel Rules 1.1(h),
7.1, and 7.2.
2 	Cal-Maine Foods, Inc.; Daybreak Foods, Inc. (Daybreak Foods); Egg Clearinghouse, Inc.;
Hillandale Farms of PA, Inc.; Hillandale Farms Corporation; Hillandale Farms East, Inc.;
Hillandale Farms, Inc.; Hillandale-Gettysburg, LLC; Rose Acre Farms, Inc.; United Egg
Producers; Urner Barry Publications, Inc. (d/b/a Expana) (Urner Barry); and Versova Holdings,
LLC.
Case MDL No. 3175 Document 80 Filed 02/10/26 Page 1 of 3

- 2 -
violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. Plaintiffs allege that defendants exploited an Avian Flu
outbreak and manipulated benchmark prices set by defendant Urner Barry. Three actions on the
motion are brought on behalf of overlapping nationwide classes of direct purchasers of shell eggs,
and the remaining three actions are brought on behalf of different classes of indirect purchasers.
Centralization under Section 1407 will eliminate duplicative discovery; prevent inconsistent
pretrial rulings, especially with respect to class certification; and conserve the resources of the
parties, their counsel, and the judiciary. 	“The Panel has frequently centralized antitrust cases
involving direct and indirect purchaser claims that arise from common factual allegations,
particularly where multiple related actions are pending.” 	In re Skelaxin (Metaxalone) Antitrust
Litig., 856 F. Supp. 2d 1350, 1351 (J.P.M.L. 2012).
We find that the Western District of Wisconsin—an historically underutilized transferee
district—is the most appropriate transferee district for this litigation. Two actions are pending in
the Western District of Wisconsin, and defendant Daybreak Foods is headquartered there. Chief
Judge James D. Peterson, who presides over two actions in this litigation, has not yet had the
opportunity to preside over multidistrict litigation. We are confident he will steer this litigation on
an efficient and prudent course.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the actions listed on Schedule A and pending outside
the Western District of Wisconsin are transferred to the Western District of Wisconsin and, with
the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable James D. Peterson, for coordinated or
consolidated pretrial proceedings.
PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION
Nathaniel M. Gorton
Acting Chair
Roger T. Benitez 	Dale A. Kimball
Madeline Cox Arleo
Case MDL No. 3175 Document 80 Filed 02/10/26 Page 2 of 3

IN RE: SHELL EGGS
ANTITRUST LITIGATION 	MDL No. 3175
SCHEDULE A
Northern District of Illinois
BIRCHMANS PARISIAN, LLC v. CAL-MAINE FOODS, INC., ET AL.,
C.A. No. 1:25−14030
PHIL-N-CINDY'S LUNCH, INC. v. CAL-MAINE FOODS, INC., ET AL.,
C.A. No. 1:25−14082
HABASH, ET AL. v. URNER BARRY PUBLICATIONS, INC., ET AL.,
C.A. No. 1:25−14112
Southern District of Indiana
KING KULLEN GROCERY CO., INC. v. CAL-MAINE FOODS, INC., ET AL.,
C.A. No. 1:25−02274
NINETEENSEVENTYNINE D/B/A THE BREAKFAST JOYNT v. CAL-MAINE
FOODS, INC., ET AL., C.A. No. 1:25−02301
Western District of Wisconsin
EDLIN v. CAL-MAINE FOODS, INC., ET AL., C.A. No. 3:25−00946
Case MDL No. 3175 Document 80 Filed 02/10/26 Page 3 of 3