289 F. Supp. 3d 1335
J.P.M.L.2018Background
- Consolidation motion under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to centralize 39 federal actions (plus related state cases) alleging infections from Sorin 3T heater-cooler devices; defendants are Sorin Group USA, Sorin Group Deutschland, and LivaNova PLC.
- Plaintiffs allege device defects and inadequate warnings/instructions led to aerosolization of tank water and exposure to non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM), including M. chimaera and M. abscessus, following open-chest surgeries.
- Plaintiffs are divided: 13 support centralization; 16 oppose (many seeking exclusion or alternate transferee districts); some ask to exclude or segregate M. chimaera cases into a separate MDL.
- This is the Panel’s second review; a prior § 1407 centralization request (MDL No. 2772) was denied in 2017 due to prior coordination and uniform opposition by parties.
- Defendants now contend informal coordination is no longer feasible given increased number of actions, districts, law firms, and related state-court cases; they seek MDL in the Middle District of Pennsylvania.
- The Panel found common issues (design, manufacture, operation, warnings, general causation) and overlapping discovery; it transferred the listed actions to the Middle District of Pennsylvania, assigned to Judge John E. Jones, III.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether centralization under § 1407 is warranted | Opponents: too many unique facts; divergent bacteria origins (M. chimaera vs M. abscessus) make MDL inefficient | Informal coordination has broken down; common issues (design, warnings, transmission) produce substantial overlap and justify centralization | Centralization granted in Middle District of Pennsylvania for coordinated pretrial proceedings |
| Whether M. chimaera cases should be excluded or split into separate MDL | Some plaintiffs: M. chimaera infections are distinct and should be excluded or form a separate MDL | Defendants: discovery has not been limited to species; many complaints allege general NTM colonization and common causation theories | Request to segregate M. chimaera cases denied; cases remain within centralized MDL |
| Whether certain advanced cases (e.g., Baker) should be included | Plaintiffs: advanced cases or medical-monitoring class actions may be inappropriate for consolidation | Defendants: did not seek inclusion of advanced/ready-for-trial cases; transferee judge can remand ready cases | Advanced Baker action not included; transferee judge may remand actions when trial-ready |
| Choice of transferee district and judge | Some plaintiffs proposed Middle District of Pennsylvania or Southern District of Iowa or District of South Carolina; others opposed centralization | Defendants argued Middle District of Pennsylvania appropriate; Judge Jones familiar with related Sorin 3T issues | Middle District of Pennsylvania selected; Judge John E. Jones, III, assigned (with consent of that court) |
Key Cases Cited
- In re: Sorin 3T Heater-Cooler Sys. Prods. Liab. Litig., 273 F.Supp.3d 1357 (J.P.M.L. 2017) (prior Panel denial of centralization explaining coordination and opposition factors)
- In re: Zimmer Durom Hip Cup Prods. Liab. Litig., 717 F.Supp.2d 1376 (J.P.M.L. 2010) (example of MDL handling of medical device product-liability matters)