IN RE: Ortho Pharmaceutical "Lippes Loop" Products Liability Litigation

Case MDL No. 336 Document 2 Filed 05/05/15 Page 1 of 6
JUDICIAL PANEL AN Sa
’ MULT TT ni RO
| | 113 1970 Co
] DOCKET NO. 336 Jil o
| PATTI: DEE Ip 135 oo
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION @ *.% 1998
IN RE ORTHO PHARMACEUTICAL "LIPPES LOOP" PRODUCTS LIABILITY "LITIGATION
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
You and each of you are hereby ORDERED to show cause } Lr
why the actions listed on the attached Schedule A should SU
not be transferred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1407 to a single B
district for coordinated or consolidated pretrial pro- oY
ceedings. a
Responses to this order shall conform with the re-
quirements of Rule 8, of the Rules of Procedure of the
Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, 65 F.R.D.
253 (1975).
~ You are further notified that the issuing of this oo
order by the Panel does not affect or suspend orders and Co
discovery proceedings in the district courts in which Co
said multidistrict litigation is pending. RPJPML :
(Rule 16).
FOR THE PANEL: oo Ee
<) 0 We 1 RE :	Sim LG. WISE i
John Minor Wisdom E
Chairman :

ME Case MDL No. 336 Document 2 Filed 05/05/15 Page 2 of 6
@ Schedule A MDL-336
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA -
"Richard and Susan Lyman v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Civil Action
Corp. No. 77-18
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
Nancy Owens v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Civil Action
Corp. No. 77-1536
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Rebecca and Luis Bodmer v. Ortho Pharmaceuticals, Civil Action
etc. No. H-77-839
DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
Carolyn Noble v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Co., Civil Action
Inc., et al. No. 77-306~B
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
C Agatha and Raymond Guzzo v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Civil Action |Corp., et al. No. C76-2708SAW |
| |
| |
_

Ca Case MDL No. 336 Document 2 Filed 05/05/15 Page 3 of 6 |
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL PANEL J
ON : HUTA pay,
MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION feLig Lo
IN RE ORTHO PHARMACEUTICAL "LIPPES ) HR 24 Lo
LOOP" PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION) DOCKET NO LARS, 197g :< Irs, ; B
OPINION AND ORDER Kor THES 3p :
HP-336
— yor	BEFORE JOHN MINOR WISDOM, CHAIRMAN, AND EDWARD WEINFELD, EDWIN b=
A. ROBSON, JOSEPH S. LORD, III*, STANLEY A. WEIGEL, ANDREW A.
CAFFREY*, AND ROY W. HARPER, JUDGES OF THE PANEL. Ce
PER CURIAM -
This litigation consists of five actions pending in
different federal districts -- one each in the Middle District
of Pennsylvania, the Eastern District of Michigan, the Southern ; NESE
District of Texas, the District of New Mexico, and the District - -
of New Jersey. All these actions involve alleged personal : So
injuries resulting from use of an intrauterine contraceptive .
device known as the "Lippes Loop." Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp., EE
the manufacturer of the Lippes Loop, is named as a defendant :
in all five actions. Two of the actions also name plaintiffs’ Co
doctors as defendants. Liability is asserted against the LL
defendants on principles of, inter alia, strict liability, ~ IERIE
breach of express and implied warranties and/or negligence, : EE
including inadequate designing, manufacturing and testing
of the Lippes Loops and failure to warn adequately of the
risks involved in its use. -
* Judges Lord and Caffrey took no part in the decision SE
of this matter. -

©Case MDL	No. 336 Document 2 Filed 05/05/15 Pagedof6 | |
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1407	(c) (i) and Rule 8, R.P.J.P. RUE
M.L., 65 F.R.D. 253, 258-59 (1975), the Panel ordered the oo
parties to show cause why these actions should not be trans- LL
ferred to a single district for coordinated or consolidated |
i pretrial proceedings. All parties that have responded --
defendant Ortho, one of the defendant physicians, and plaintiffs .
in three actions -- oppose transfer. .
Although we are of the view that these actions involve | oo
some common questions of fact, see generally In re A. H. B
Robins Co., Inc. "Dalkon Shield" IUD Products Liability
Litigation, 406 F. Supp. 540, 542 (J.P.M.L. 1875), we find oo
Hat transfer under Section 1407 would not at the present BE
time serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses or -
promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Accordingly, we vacate the show cause order. :
Plaintiff and defendant Ortho in the New Mexico action SRE
represent that pretrial proceedings have been completed and |
trial is imminent in that action. In the Michigan action we
are advised that a discovery cutoff date of June 1, 1978, and g EE
a trial date in August of this year have been set. Because a So
these two actions are so advanced, we believe that they should i
be excluded from transfer under Section 1407. See In re Celotex oo
Corporation "Technifoam" Products Liability Litigation, 68 F.R.D. : ol
502, 505 (J.P.M.L. 1975). Since only three actions remain, we ) Co
are not convinced that the common factual issues are sufficiently

“res Case MDL No. 336 Document2 Filed 05/05/15 Page	5 of 6
- 3 =
® complex and the accompanying discovery time consuming enough to
justify transfer. See In re Scotch Whiskey Antitrust Litigation,
299 F. Supp. 543, 544 (J.P.M.L. 1969).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the order to show cause
regarding the actions listed on the following Schedule A
be, and the same hereby is, VACATED, without prejudice to the
right of any party to move for transfer under Section 1407 at
| a later date if additional actions are filed or if any party
believes that future circumstances otherwise warrant transfer.
®
eo

Case MDL No. 336 Document 2 Filed 05/05/15 Page 6 of 6 SET
DOCKET NO. 336 -~ IN RE ORTHO PHARMACEUTICAL "LIPPES LOOP"
PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
SCHEDULE A
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Richard and Susan Lyman v. Ortho Pharma- Civil Action
ceutical Corp. No. 77-18
EASTERN DISTRICT QF MICHIGAN
Nancy Owens v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Civil Action
Corp. No. 77-1536
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Rebecca and Luis Bodmer v. Ortho Civil Action
Pharmaceuticals, etc. No. H-77-839
DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
Carolyn Noble v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Civil Action C	Co., Inc., et al. No. 77-306B
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Agatha and Raymond Guzzo v. Ortho Civil Action
Pharmaceutical Corp., et al. No. 78-162