Case Information
*1 UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL on MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION (SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE) CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO 35)
On June 7, 2021, the Panel transferred 17 civil action(s) to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407. See 543 F.Supp.3d 1377 (J.P.M.L. 2021). Since that time, 132 additional action(s) have been transferred to the Northern District of California. With the consent of that court, all such actions have been assigned to the Honorable Charles R. Breyer.
It appears that the action(s) on this conditional transfer order involve questions of fact that are common to the actions previously transferred to the Northern District of California and assigned to Judge Breyer.
Pursuant to Rule 7.1 of the Rules of Procedure of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, the action(s) on the attached schedule are transferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to the Northern District of California for the reasons stated in the order of June 7, 2021, and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Charles R. Breyer.
This order does not become effective until it is filed in the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The transmittal of this order to said Clerk shall be stayed 7 days from the entry thereof. If any party files a notice of opposition with the Clerk of the Panel within this 7 day period, the stay will be continued until further order of the Panel.
FOR THE PANEL: Nov 29, 2022
John W. Nichols Clerk of the Panel 11/29/2022 *2 SCHEDULE CTO − 35 − TAG − ALONG ACTIONS DIST DIV. C.A.NO. CASE CAPTION
ALABAMA NORTHERN ALN 6 22 − 01384 Winston County, Alabama v. McKinsey and Company Inc
ALABAMA SOUTHERN The City of Gulf Shores, Alabama v. McKinsey and
ALS 1 22 00432 Company, Inc. CALIFORNIA EASTERN
CAE 2 22 01999 City of Chico, California v. McKinsey and Company, Inc.
MARYLAND Baltimore County, Maryland v. McKinsey and Company,
MD Inc. Anne Arundel County, Maryland v. McKinsey and Company, MD Inc. MD City of Bowie, Maryland v. McKinsey and Company, Inc.
NEW YORK SOUTHERN
NYS −ap- Alma, Georgia et al v. McKinsey & Company, Inc. et al Bayonne, New Jersey et al v. McKinsey & Company, Inc. et NYS −ap- al NORTH DAKOTA
ND Cass County v. McKinsey and Company, Inc.
WASHINGTON WESTERN WAW City of Seattle v. McKinsey & Co Inc et al
WEST VIRGINIA SOUTHERN S. U. et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al J. A. H. et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al L. M. H. et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al A. L. K. et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al *3 Opposed 11/28/2022
WVS S.W. et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al Opposed 11/28/2022 WVS K.A.D. et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al WVS D.R.E. et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al Opposed 11/28/2022 Opposed 11/28/2022 WVS K. B. et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al WVS A.B.F. et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al Opposed 11/28/2022 WVS M. B. et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al Opposed 11/28/2022 WVS A.S.A. et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al M. B. et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al M. E. B. et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al M. B. et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al A. S. A. et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al