Legal Opinion

In re Anheuser-Busch Beer Labeling Marketing & Sales Practices Litigation

United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation

Decided June 10, 2013No. MDL No. 2448PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TRANSFER ORDER

JOHN G. HEYBURN II, Chairman.

Before the Panel: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in a Northern District of California action move for centralization of this litigation in the Northern District of California. This litigation currently consists of six actions pending in six districts, as listed on Schedule A.1

Plaintiffs in all actions support the motion in its entirety. Defendant AnheuserBusch Companies, LLC, opposes centralization. If the Panel orders centralization over its objection, Anheuser-Busch argues the Panel should select the Northern District of Ohio.

All actions…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. In Re Kauffman Mutual Fund ActionsUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 1972
  2. In re Maxim Integrated Products, Inc.United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2012

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In re Uber Techs., Inc., Data Sec. Breach Litig.United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2018
  2. In re Allura Fiber Cement Siding Prods. Liab. Litig.United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2019
  3. UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL on CE B N Y T R ACC L D I SSS T R I C T ODistrict Court, C.D. California · 2018
  4. UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL on CE B N Y T R ACC L D I SSS T R I C T ODistrict Court, C.D. California · 2018
  5. UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL on CE B N Y T R ACC L D I SSS T R I C T ODistrict Court, C.D. California · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API