IN RE: Mack Truck, Inc., Antitrust Litigation

. ¥ 3 . :
SO f Case MDL No. 178 Document 2 Filed 05/01/15 Page 1 of 4 :} gi oR H ood ;
-~ | . £4 3 7 i
! !
I RE MACK TRU KING. ANTITRUST LITICATION K33
Cite ge 335 F.Supp. 5070 (1074 - :
IL is therefore ordered that all actions Jaret PF. Bonham, ef af wv. Civit Action :
; ~ 1 Pag Americ i WAYS : NV 71-1316--PMH- -
listed on the attached Schedule A pend. Pi vero World fievays, Ho. (V-72-1316-PiK :
: ing in districts othopddman the Centre on : :
=m distri Z. AL a e Central Yirtte Cotte, of al § The Civil Action :
Inatrict of Californga be, and the same pang co 4 flo. 4-78-1362 PMH . :
rah ten cana fobre 1 N ” . :
herehy ave, transfepred to the Central pics yy windorwan, $ret civil Action :
: District of Californih and, wilh the cone av. Pan. American Worid No. CV =74--1468-PMH . I	: ira 8 . i
gent of thal conrk, fgaigned to the Hop- Aras dncoet alg i
oralic Peiraon M, fall for coordinated Sein Ho Hetheringtof ere. Civit Action . f
oo RT ns coed v. Pan American World Aire No. (V-73-1481-PMH
: or eonsolidated pretgial proceedings un- ways, Inc. et al.
. 3 28 U.S.C. 8 1447 wits i Hon
de 2 U.3.C § Ry 1 with the actions Hermann Muenster, ot 81 v. Civil Action ’
listed on Schedule Aland pending in that ras American World Ai pays, Mo. CV-74- 1494-PMH N\diatrict. inc, et al. : |
BN Anitele’a Matautia, et 8 wv. Civil Action .
) SCHECW.E A Man American World Air iy, Mo, CV--74-1539-PMH	3 Inc, et al, 3
Central District of caonid { +I + ’ Horthern District of Califenia I. a
Favela fracas Hoffman, ef Civil Action Enis “Zand -
al. wv. Fen American Worle Mo. CV-74-676-PMH Numa Pahaiu, et al. wv, Tan Civil Action
. Alrways, Inc, et al : Amarican World Airways, fpr, Ho. C73-555-SAN
Natinnal Bank of Commerced Civil Action et al. - 5
etc. v. Pan American Worl Mo. CV-T73-677-PMH {lean Arthur Phillips, et fal. Civil Actien
. . Airways, Ine, ct all } v. The Boeina Co. . £ No. €74-1228-RHS
. Cathy Ann Giles, ete. v. Pag Civil Action ) Richard V. Gaines I, ot atfy. Civit Action . -
: American World Ajrways, ine Ma, CV--74-424-FMH The Ba=ing Ca, 1 Mo, £74-1227-RHS
et al 3 4
i } Viestern District of Washingien :
Dick A. Smith v. Pan Amery Civil Action TTT	es mm
ican World Airways, Inc, ef: No, CV-74-606-PMH Mational Bank of Commerge Civil Acting
. . al. | v. Pan American World AE: Ne. (71-1668	: : Rebert Peyton v. The Bosingl Civil Action ways, te, et a
: Co. £ No. CV-74-830-PMH District of Wah
Lauvence B. Green, et al vE Civil Action :
- ot J ; = Pameia Frances Hoffman, cof wit Acting	Yat Ar als, 3 { ays , CV.-74-957- [8 N hi
( pe foescan World Afrw wh Ho. CV.-74-957-PRIH al v. Betty Petersen, st al Na. ©74-141prey oC ’ E . . Nationa ant mere ivi H 3
== Michael Josh Haviick, et alg Civil Action pp mmerze, Civil Action	v. Pan American World Alr-f Ne. CV-74-1125-PMH «CV. Betly Petersen, et al. Ho. C-74-142
wavs el al, : . |
Chong Won, et ux. v. Pa Civil Action .
i msvie Worl Always «Mo. CV--71-1220-PM w
hone ican World Alrways, wf Mo. CV--74--1220-PMH ¢ Sma
: © Chief Tapuvasa Saifollo Am-¥ Civil Action -
. pores, eb al v. Pan Americang No. CY-74-1221-PRH .
World Airways, el al. & . .
Tuipata Sale, et ux. v. Pan £ Civit Action In re PACK TELL HYNO AT )
Arerican ‘Norld Airways, Inc, 8 No. CV-74-1222--PMH TT AE oer Ck o ANG, ANTE :
ob al. . | TRUST LITIGATION.
Valelia Anu v. Pan Amer- B Civil Action No. 118. .
lean World Ajrways, Inc, et No. 0Y-74-1223-PMH _- . Ca
; al y 5 : Judicial Panel on Mullidistrict Litigation, :
. Chict Tiatia Tiololo, et al. v. § Civil Action Oct, 17, 1971.
Fan American World Airways, Elo. CV-74-1224-PNH : .
Ine. et at } ¥
Sade Setali v. Pan American glivit Action The Judicial Panel on Multidirtyict :Warid Airways, Inc, et al. fNo. CV--74.-1225-PMH cpr . . Ca. . R
: Litigation transfered multidiatrict anti- :
Mally Alten v. Bare American §Civil Action trust cases challenge nan facture!	World Avs. fue, et al. fo. CV-rd-a2ze-pmy TL cies challenging manufacturer's
# vertical integration of wholesale - ’
Chil Tagaloa Mikaleae Ab- ECivil Action rt d Hy frradion of whales the and reFae, et al. vo Pan American Blo. cv-ia-1227-pmn tail operations to the Fasiern District of
Wiarid Adrways, Inc, et at Washington, alt parties favoring trans-
Qoger Cann, ele. v. Pan Civil Action for of claima to that district. }
American World Alrways, Inc, No. CV-74-1345-PtH y - .
‘ et al. Order accordingly.
® ! :

Co Co Case MDL No. 178 Document 2 Filed 05/01/15 Page 2 of 4
- , Soe ood IS 3
||
504 383% FRDERAT SUPPLEMENT
Courts C2L77.2 vant Seclion 1407 preeccedings and,
C : Multidistrict antitrust cases chal- thevefore, do not oppose transfer oflenging manufacturer's alleged vertical these actions to a single district. None-
integration of wholesale and retail oper- theless, defendants do oppose the Fast
ations would be transferred to the West- ern District of Washington as the trans
ern District of Washington, all pavtics force forura and, instead, have réguested :
Co favoring transfer of all claims to that transfer of all actions to the Western :
district for coordinated or consolidated District of Washington. fu their reply
: pretrial proceedings. 28 U.S.C.A. § + brief plaintiffs agree that many of the :
1407. potential witnesses aud doctwents rele
~ vant to the issues raised iy this litipga- ’
. CTT tion ave located in the Western District
Before ALFRED P. MURRAIL *, of Washington. They now favor the
: Chairman, and JOHN MINOR WIS- transfer of all claims lo that district for
i DON, EDWARD WEINFELD, EDWIN Section 1407 treatment. a
A. ROBSON, WILLIAM H. BECKER *, On the basis of the papers submitted
JOSEPH S. LORD, III, and STANLEY and the hearing held, we find that these
A. WEIGEL, Judges of the Panel. actions involve common questious of fact
and that their transfer to the Western
OPINION AND ORDER District of Washington will best serve
: ee the convenience of the parties and wit-
PER CURIAM. nesses and promote the just and effi- N
This litigation involves three actions cient conduct of the litigation.
pending in three different districts: the Le .
Western District of Washington, the It is therefore ordered that all actions
: Tastern District of Washington and the listed on the attached Schedule A pend-
Pe District of Alaska. Each action was in- ing in districts other than the Western
\ stituted against substantially identical District of Washington he, and the fame }
R defendants and alleged co-conspirators. hereby are, transferred to the Western
“ Plaintiffs challenge the acquisition of District of Washington and, with the
EEE Automotive Equipment Company by consent of that court, assigned to the
Mack Truck and allege that the decigion Honorable Donald 5. Voorhees for coor-
of Mack Truck to integrate vertically its dinated or ceunsolidataed pretrial proceed-
: wholesale and retail operations and elim- MBS pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407 with
: inate independent distributors in favor the action listed on Schedule A and } -
: of wholly owned distributors, and the pending in that district. : . he
predatory tactics of Mack Truck and oo SCHEDULEA
; Automotive Equipment to effectuate } —
these policies are in violation of the an- Westera	District ‘of Washington
titrust laws. - Seattle Association of Credit Men Civil Action .
Plaintiffs have jointly moved the Pan- ¥- Signal Oil Co. et al. No. 9273
} ; cl to transfer these cages to the FBastern Eastern District ofWashington a.
‘ District of Washington for coordinated L,, Parts, Inc. v. Mack Truck, Civil Action
or consolidated pretrial proceedings puv- et Mo. 3731
suant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407. Defendants District of Alaska
have conceded that sufficiently complex con ent Services. Ltd, v track Civil Action
common questions of fact exist to war- Truc ota "Mo. A-76-73
: ) + Judges Murrah and Becker were unsble to part in the consideration or derision of this
attend the hearing awl, therefore. took no matter.
®o

. vo Case MDL No. 178 Document 2 Filed 05/01/15 Page 3 of 4
wih FADIRAL SURPFLOMENT .
o a ES Before ALVRED 2. 2IUERAILL ChairLove MACH TRUCKS, INC. ANTI nian, and CIN JIINCH WISDOM, Bo-
TRUST LITIGATION. WARD WEINFLLD, £DWiN A. ROD-
. rent Sercices, Ltd. v. Mack Tricks, SON, WILLIAM IH. BECKER, JOSE .
O.Alaska, Civil Action No. A=75-81. S. LORD, Iii, and STANLEY A. Wil-
Xo. 175. GEL, Judges of ire Panel :
: Jud, Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.
Nov. 24, 1575. OPINIGN AND QORDIR }
: PER CURIAMNL
Former distributor brought action The Panel previously itrvansferved «il,
azainss truck manufacturer for breach actions in this litigation fo the Weslern
of contract and sought to have action District of Washingion and, with ithe
teansforred for inclusion in centralized consent of ‘that court, assigned them (0
pretrial proceedings pending in the he Honorable Donaid S. Voorhees for
Western District of Washington with coordinated or consolidated pretrial pro-
". respect Us numerous antitrust actioums ceedings pursuant	ic 23 U.S.C. § 1407.1
arainst the truck manufacturer includ- Various defendants invoived in the lil-
ing an antitrust action brought by the sationn the transferee district, one of :
Qistributor. The Judicial Panel on Mul- Whom is the sole defendant in Tue
ticisivict Litigation held that analysis of above-captioned action, move the Panel
pleadings and other papers showed that for an order transiercing it fo the West- N
“the subsequent action of distributor was GD District of Washington for inclusion
a simpic contract action capable of In tne centralized pretrial procealings
“prompt resolution and should not be en- pending there. Piaintiff in this acuion
tangled with complex antitrust matters 0DPPoses transfer. We fina insuizicieat
previously jransferved. > basis for transfer under Section 1407
C Motioa-totransferdenied. and, accordingly, deny defendants’ mo-- © See wlso Jud.PanMultLit, 383 F. COV oo
AA "Supp. 503. EB : In 1539, Bguipment Services, Lid. en-: oe tered into a distribulorshin agreement
: ' SE Co with Mack Trucks, Ine, wheresy Ecuip-
Couns GE77.2 = meant Services agrezd to sell vehicles anc
. Analysis of pleading	in former dis- parts manufactured by Mae Trucss.
iributor’s action against truck manufac- Subscguenily, Equipment Services estal- }
- turer along with the papers presented by lished certain accounts for sales of oo
parties “aisclosed that such action was a trucks cor financing of parts aad
sitaple contract action capable of prompt floored-inventory with Mack Trucks and
resolution which should not be tangled in lack Financial, a wholly-owned subsici-
the complex antitrust matters previously ary of ifack Trucks. By 1970, Eauin-
trensterred for consolidated or coordi- went Services aliegecdly defaulted on
nated pretrial proceedings including dis- these accounts and failed to remit
: tributor’s antitrust action against truck promptly to Mack Financial the proceeds
moenufacturer, so that even though the from (he sale of ilcor-planned veniclos,
actions save rise Lo some common faze Ader wasueceasiul atiomnis were snus
tuai nexus the subsequent action would two negoiinie & mutual Tevminniion NE
not be transferred. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1407. heir distributorship arrangement, Jin ’
I. An re Mack Trucks, Inc. Antitrust Liligue- ILD. 253, Sob (1675), tke question of
} tun, 383 I.Supp. 503 (Jud.Pandiul	lit fiuusier of this action under U5 UNC |
1074). } 1407 was submitted ou the beliefs.
2. ‘The purdes waived their rigut to oral ure :
miaent and, pursuaat to RUG CALLL 14, 65
@® “. . op i. ) Pp “ e oo

EJ - Case MDL No. 178 Document2 Filed 05/01/15 Page	4 of 4	! i» I .	ra
ENCTUOE MACK TRUCHS, 160. Axerssy IATICATION 45. To Cleo us 400 F.Sappo1300 (3073)
- : Tracks levminated Bgaimment Services approximately 315,000; and thal thous
' aso distributor in 1972. : installment salos eoniracrs nave been
Trereadter, in 1073, Ecuipment Serv- fully satlsfica By Lie purchasers hia .
ies copumensod an antitvust action ® unGer, hut Geliniant BAL veduscl fo vee
against Wack Trucks, Mack Financial Pn ine cash reserves wo Douipmen: :
and olhers, alleging, tnier alin, thai de- Services aespiie Janisvs HELD. A
rendanis engaoed in predaiory tactics to ” res, PRIA sees sikgmeent for
inlegrote variivally the whalesale and re- Loe Sin Cr Hause reseiveNy “2150, Ch nar
dl operations of Alack Trucks, which vies Sepulaied Lo Lae Fiihg oe & county
effectively iminated independent dig- Cea Py Mack Trucks fox 73,538.51,wwibitors from competing with wholly- when represents the amounts wievediy
owned aisiributsrs by unreasonably in- pwing en tae open PRIS aLtaung ox
creasing the independent distributors SUUIpment Services with Mack Trucks. Est of Sairg Budinees TT ea anect tira . i :
Lo OL Cond oi nESS ooLe Movants contend thoi transfor of
4 pra Bruges Los BUrlndans COn- Equipment Services I for inclusion icS9Irco uxornal IT SENHA TI . . - .
ooha 3 enema Following man- the ongoing pretrial proceedings in .. I Tes A adh RY Washington would further ine BUYposes	return of Srnepdss ‘OT GN ya ete af . oT . . ~ oo
aoirCe ONoy-otaliod ps a or Seciion 1807 pecause tae tasting is-TAR PRA = LO PR EEE BUes underiying the coniraci claims in
ey accocnt to Bquipment Services for Us action are Inexiricanly interrch :non sy owing nIrLIIant to their franchise wis action < L ab Leary Heriot
PERS DR A CRIS Ren LY een Uy to inose involved in the antizrus: alicoo- N	nrreenente and 3) sciendanta vofiens . . . . R
so Lenl Pi tions asserted in Equipment Services«wa weet tu Sean sre ib mE Es i He 1. We disagree.Fenannis’ repossession of Bauipment : :
Services’ equipment, inventory, parts Our analysis of the nieadings i
and other property that was used as col Sguiprend Services IF wlonzy with ihe
IN fuieral for ceviain loans made by defend- papers submitted by the parities por.ants to plaintiff, suades os thal i is 4 simple eontraen woe
® Ia 1975, Lquipment Services institut- tion capable of prompt resclulion, which.ed an uciion for bresen of contract should not be entangiod with ihe come
= against Mack Trucks in Alesha state plow antitrust matiers previously transg-
court, which was soon removed to the ferred. Thus, the just and efficent
Clsirict of Alasiad The complaint con- conduct of both the litlgabion in tae
: tains ailegutions thud the parties’ finan. transfovee district as well as Fewipment
ial arrangemen: required Equipment Services II can best be achicved by ieav-
-erviess to establish a cash reserve with ing this action in Alaska, notwithistand-
Meek Trucks and Mack Financial for ing out recognition that the similarity
each velilele plaintiff sold on an install- of parties between the two Dguipraent
ment sales basis; that upen full pay- Services” actions gives vise 16 ab least .
ment under the installment sales cop. Some common Factual nexus.
tract, defendant was to return the cash It is thercfove ordeved thai Selon
reserves to plaintiff; that when defend- ants’ rastion to transfer [Loulpment
ant terminated plaintiff's distribuior- Services, Lid. v. Meck Fricke, fae, D.
Shin, a number of inataliment sales con- Alaska, Civil Action Wao. A-TH-51, be,
tracts existed with total cash reserves of and fhe same hereby is, denied.
< Chis action, entitled Equipment Services, 4. This action, Chereinalter eeferrad io a
LE eo Mack Trneka, ot al, D.Adasku, Civil Hyiiprenl Services I, is the sublect of de-
Seifon Noo A-TH-50, was one of the wetjons fendanis’ motion {0 iruaslfee,weviounly tesaslerced by ihe Panel fo the
< Ventern Disirie! of Washington for seotion
. “nT teentinent. Io is hercioaltee refered
ony Sigsipmend Services f,
i ™ Vi TLSupe.	ee 301 ’-
tot ig TE ae