IN RE: Rely Tampon Products Liability Litigaiton

Case MDL No. 497 Document 2 Filed 05/19/15 Page 1 of 6 :
FORCES Fd EES : : So
she Thies gl oe :CEES ; :
HAZ -9 98 a. |
DOCKET NO. 497 PAilasian } SE
CLERK 67 7} 5.0 5 7/49 '
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION CT : [re
IN RE RELY TAMPON PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
BEFORE ANDREW A. CAFFREY, CHAIRMAN, ROY W. HARPER,* CHARLES R. Fa
WEINER, EDWARD S. NORTHROP, ROBERT H. SCHNACKE, FRED DAUGHERTY, Ce
AND SAM C. POINTER, JR.,* JUDGES OF THE PANEL - 3
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
PER CURIAM
Presently before the Panel are two motions, pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. §1407, filed by two groups of plaintiffs in
actions in this docket, to centralize in a single district .
for coordingted or consolidated pretrial proceedings the - EETI	92 actions=’ listed on the attached Schedule A. Ll ’ ol
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 involve ; a.
some common questions of fact, we are not persuaded that E
these common questions of fact will predominate over individual oo
questions of fact present in each action. Furthermore, : .
we note that 1) discovery in many actions in this docket :
is well advanced; and 2) pretrial proceedings have been : :
completed and trial is imminent in at least two actions. a.
Under these circumstances, we cannot conclude that centralization :
of the actions in this litigation under Section 1407 will To
further the purposes of the statute. See In re Asbestos I
and Asbestos Insulation Material Products Liability Litigation, IE SERRE
431 F. Supp. 906, 910 (J.P.M.L. 1977). i ) EE oe
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motions for transfer
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1407 be, and the same hereby are,
DENIED.
* Judges Harper and Pointer took no part in the decision . .
of this matter.
1/ The motions before the Panel included 106 actions.
The schedules of actions attached to the two motions, however,
include thirteen actions that have been dismissed and one
action that was never pending in federal court. Accordingly,
the two motions taken together encompass a total of 92 actions
presently pending in federal district courts.

Case MDL No. 497 Document 2 Filed 05/19/15 Page 2 of 6
SCHEDULE A
. MDI.-497 —-- In re Rely Tampon Products Liability Litigation
Northern District of Alabama .
® Deborah Louise Parker v. Proctor §& Gamble, et al.,
C.A. No. CV-80-HM-1585-S : .
Theresa J. Boney v. Proctor §& Gamble, et al.,
C.A. No. CVv-81-C-1062-S :
Eastern District of Arkansas
Mike Ford, etc. v. Proctor & Gamble Co.,
C.A. No. LR-C-81-493 ’
Northern District of California
Carol A. Thompson, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Co.
et al., C.A. No. C-80-3711-SAW
District of Colorado .
Deletha Dawn Lampshire, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Co.,
et al., C.A. No. 80-1567
District of Connecticut
Paula Doucette v. The Proctor & Gamble Co.,
C.A. No. H-81-406 ‘
Middle District of Florida
Paula Beaudoin, et al. Vv. The Proctor & Gamble Distributing
Co., et al., C.A. No. 80-575-ORL-CIV-Y
Shannon M. Keeney, et al. v. The Proctor Distributing Co.,
C.A. No. 80-597-ORL-CIV-Y
. Tammy Carr v. International Playtex Inc., et al.,
C.A. No. 80-611-ORL-CIV-R
[ . Sandra J. Nester, et al. v. The Proctor	& Gamble Distributing	Co., C.A. No. 81-160-CIV-T-H -
Northern District of Georgia
Robert A. Ellis, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing
Co., C.A. No. C81-794-A
Southern District	of Illinois
Charles File, Adm. v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing
Co., C.A. No. 81-3213 :
Central District of Illinois
George Thomas Dorris, etc., et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble
Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-2180
Northern District of Iowa
Michael L. Kehm, Adm. v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing
Co., et al., C.A. No. C80-119
Nancy C. Vohs v. Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., et al.,
C.A. No. C81-4069

MDI1.-497 2 :Pp Case MDL No. 497 Document2 Filed 05/19/15 Page	3 of 6
District of Kansas
Kathleen E. McLaughlin v. The Proctor & Gamble pDistributin :
® . ~ Co., et al., C.A. No. 80-4265Vickie G. Helton v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products
Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-1116
Barbara J. 1lvey Vv. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products Co.,
et al., C.A. No. 81-1037
: Judy M. Mitchell v. The Proctor §& Gamble Paper Products: co., et al., C.A. No. 81-1038 ;
Gloria L. DeRoulet v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products )
co., et al., C.A. No. 81-1039 :
Cynthia Sue Souter v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products
Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-1118
Anne E.. Somer v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products Co.,
. et ai., C.A. No. 81-1185
Cynthia A. Butler v. The Proctor & Gamble Distributing Co.,et al., C.A. No. 81-1184
Carolyn K. McKinsey	.v. The Proctor &§ Gamble Manufacturing
Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-4123
Janet L. Matney v. Proctor & Gamble Distributing Co., et al.,
C.A. No. 81-1263
Sarah P. Hughes v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products Co.,
et al., C.A. No. 81-1359 :
Dana L. Lewis v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products Co.,
et al., C.A. No. 81-1357
Deborah L. Tilghman Vv. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products
[ Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-1358	Western District of Kentucky
‘Brenda Coreau V. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co.,
C.A. No. C81-0072-P(J)
Karen McGregor v. The Proctor	§& Gamble Manufacturing Co.,
C.A. No. 81-0076-P(J)
. Eastern District of Louisiana
Cathy Baudry v. Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., et al.,C.A. No. 81-1827 ’
Peggy Burns Vv. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co., et al.,C.A. No. 81-1863
Herman J. Byrnes, etc. v. The Proctor & Gamble Distributing
Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-2413
Eastern District of Michigan
Carol Anne Keene v. The Proctor t¢ Gamble Co., et al.,
C.A. No. 81-10060-NI :

MDIL~497 .3	pe2 Case MDL No. 497 Document2 Filed 05/19/15 Page	4 of 6
Western District of Missouri
' Larry D. Clark v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co.,
et al., C.A. No. 80-0952-CV-W-5
® Mary Christine Cervantes v. The Proctor & Gamble Co., et al.,	C.A. No. 81-0488-CV-W-5
Athalee Kay Manley V. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing
Co., et al., C.A. No. 80-0907 -CV-W-5
Sharon Davis v. The Proctor & Gamble Co., et al.,
C.A. No. 81-0314-CV-W-5
Debra Ann Bailey, et al. v. The Proctor §& Gamble Manufacturing
Co., et al., C.A. No. 80-0910-CV-W-5
Sherrie D. Biggs v. The Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co.,
et al., C.A. No. 81-0047-W-5
Shawn L. Roberts v. Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co.,
et al., C.A. No. 81-0036-CV-W-5
Mary C. Parker v. The Proctor & Gamble Co., et al.,C.A. No. 81-0238-CV-W-5
Arsenius Wasinger, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Co., et al., i
C.A. No. 81-04140-CV-W-5 N
Perry Lane Ruckizan v. The Proctor & Gamble Co., et al.,
C.A. No. 81-5062-CV-W-5 .
Eastern District of Missouri
. Karen K. Lanpher, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products
Co., C.A. No. 581-0025C
District of Montana
Puth E. Pilgrim v. Proctor & Gamble, Inc.,
C.A. No. CvB81-18-BU
® District of New Hampshire= Mary Ellen Brady, et al. v. Proctor & Gamble Co.,
C.A. No. 80-494-L a
. Western District	of New York
“Thomas H. Anderhault, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Co.,
C.A. No. CIV-80-996C ’
Philip J. Maciuska, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Co.
C.A. No. CIV-81-34-C
. Southern District of New York
Jacqueline Lieber, et al. v. The Proctor	& Gamble Distributing
Co., C.A. No. 81-CIVv-3708
Northern District of Oklahoma
Joanne E. Watt, et al. Vv. Proctor & Gamble Co.,
C.A. No. 81-C-111-B
western District of Oklahoma
CynthiaCantrell v. The Proctor © Gamble Distributing	£o..C.A. No. CIV-81-985
Kristine M. Moen v. Proctor & Gamble Distributing Co.’~~ C.A. No. CIVv-81-791T

MDL-497 -p.4 Case MDL No. 497 Document2 Filed 05/19/15 Page	5 of 6
Eastern District of Pennsylvania
: Mary Beth Ralston v. The Proctor §& Gamble Co.,
C.A. No. 80-4109
oN Sheila A. Serianni, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Co.,
> et al., C.A. No. 80-4652
Marilyn Douglas, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Co.,
C.A. No. 81-2425 :
Anita Peters v. The Proctor & Gamble Co., : :
C.A. No. 81-2427 iner)
District of South Carolina
Sidney M. Thompson, etc. v. Proctor & Gamble, Inc., et al., .
C.A. No. 81-71-0
Alice K. Curbeam v. Proctor & Gamble,
C.A. No. 80-1916-9 . :
Western District of Tennessee
Kathy Blount Woods, et al. v. Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing
Corp., et al., C.A. No. 80-1128
John M. Rose, etc. v. Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co.,
Tet al., C.A. No. 81-1008
Teresa Jones, et al. v. Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Corp.,
C.A. No. 81-1024
Patricia Addington Castleman v. Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing
. Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-2216
Middle District of Tennessee
- Diane Carpenter, et al. v. Proctor & Gamble Paper Products
Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-3479
— Jan Bown Meadows, et al. v. Proctor & Gamble Paper Products
- Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-3478N Avonda L. Lamb, et al. v. Proctor & Gamble Paper Products
Co., et al., C.A. No. 81-3480
’ Betty Jean Grimes v. Proctor & Gamble Paper Products Co.,
et al., C.A. No. 81-2021
Eastern District of Texas )
Jeanne Spaulding v. Proctor & Gamble Distributing Co.,
C.A. No. B-80-778-CA oC .
District of Utah a
Richard J. Fors, et al. v. Proctor & Gamble Co.,
: C.A. No. C-80-539-J
Robin Murdock v. Proctor & Gamble Co., ’
C.A. No. C-80-0587-J
. Sandra Bryant v. Proctor & Gamble Co.,
C.A. No. C-80-0597-W . .
‘Linda Joyce Muir v..Proctor & Gamble Co.,
C.A. No. C-81-0207-J
Cindy Malmstrom v. Proctor & Gamble Co.,
C.A. No. C-81-0461-C .
Mary Jane Ogle v. Proctor & Gamble. Co.,
C.A. No. C-81-0546-W
Holly E. Staples v. The Proctor & Gamble Co.,
C.A. No. C-81-0041-W . :
Debbie L. Crozier v. Proctor & Gamble,
C.A. No. C-81-0011-W :
~

MDL-497 p.5 Case MDL No. 497 Document2 Filed 05/19/15 Page	6 of 6
Eastern District of Washington
’ Monica Fabio, et al. v. Proctor & Gamble, Inc.,
C.A. No. C-80-383-RJM .
Sandi D. Neddo v. Proctor §& Gamble, Inc.,
® : C.A. No. C-80-415-RJM
Deborah L. Hancock v. Proctor & Gamble Co.,
C.A. No. C-80-440-RJM
Catherine L. . Kujawski v. Proctor & Gamble, Inc., et al.,
C.A. No. C-81-003-JLQ
} Southern District of West Virginia :
Theresa Kathleen Jarrett, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Co.,
C.A. No. CA-80-2453
Eastern District of Wisconsin
Susan J. Voss, et al. v. Proctor & Gamble Co., et al.,
C.A. No. 80-C-924
Susan M. Menard, et al. v. Proctor & Gamble Co., et al.,
C.A. No. 80-C-948 :
Joyce E. Jaraczewski, et al. v. Proctor & Gamble Co.,
: C.A. No. 81-C-407
Susan Jo White v. Proctor & Gamble Co., :
C.A. No. 81-C-948
.Western District of Wisconsin :
Lynnette Richards v. Proctor & Gamble Co.,
C.A. No. 80-C-596
Southern District of Florida :
Vicki Alley v, The Procter & Gamble Co.,
C.A. No. 81-8398-CIV-J2G
( District of Montang
Karla X, Easton, et al. v, The Procter & Gamble Co,, et 3l.,C.A, No. CV-81-123-M
District of New Jersey
Stacy E, Wolf, et al, v, The Procter & Gamble Co,,C.A. No. 82-130
Eastern Digtrict of Pennsylvania Co
Marilyn Hilliard v, The Procter & Gamble Co.,
. C.A. No. 81-3843
District of South Dakota ’
Michelle Cramton, etc. Vv. Procter & Gamble Co,, :C.A. No. 81-4200
Eastern District of Wisconsin
: Teresa Campshure Ve The Procter & Gamble Cog,
C.A. No, 81-C-1060