In Re Transocean Ltd. Securities Litigation
2010 WL 4923895
J.P.M.L.2010Background
- Two related securities actions involve Transocean: Foley (SDNY) and Johnson Mutual Funds Trust (SDTX).
- Plaintiffs moved under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to centralize these actions in SDTX or SDNY.
- Transocean and executives oppose centralization or prefer SDNY as transferee.
- This is the second § 1407 motion; a prior related action (Yuen) was dismissed and centralization sought in NY in that action.
- Only two actions are involved in this docket, creating a heavier burden to justify centralization.
- Panel denies the motion for centralization after considering the minimal number of actions and lack of compelling need.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 1407 centralization is warranted for two actions | Johnson/Quasi-plaintiffs seek centralization | Transocean opposes, or favors NY as transferee | Denied centralization |
| Whether the prior actions and maneuvers undermine centralization rationale | New filed action creates multidistrictity | Movant previously sought NY centralization in a different action | Not persuasive to centralize |
| Whether the overlap with BP actions supports centralization | Discovery overlap justifies coordination | Unclear, not dispositive | Not considered sufficient for centralization |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Royal American Indus., Inc. Sec. Litig., 407 F.Supp. 242 (J.P.M.L. 1976) (burden to justify centralization when few actions)
- In re: BP p.l.c. Sec. Litig., 734 F.Supp.3d 1376 (J.P.M.L. 2010) (centralization considerations after related Gulf actions)