Legal Opinion
In re Mirena IUD Products Liability Litigation
United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
Decided April 8, 2013No. MDL No. 2434PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TRANSFER ORDER
KATHRYN H. VRATIL, Acting Chairman.
Before the Panel:* Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, plaintiffs in one action move for centralization of this litigation in the Northern District of Ohio. This litigation against Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc., currently consists of eight actions pending in eight districts, as listed on Schedules A and B. The cases in this litigation primarily involve injuries allegedly caused by the Mirena intrauterine contraceptive system. The cases listed on Schedule A allege that the product may migrate away from its original position, perforate the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- In Re Darvocet, Darvon & Propoxyphene Products Liability LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2011
- In Re Zimmer Durom Hip Cup Products Liability LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2010
- In re Hyundai & Kia Fuel Economy LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2013
3Cited by12 opinions
- In re Mirena IUS Levonorgestrel-Related Products Liability LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2014
- Baker v. Wright Medical Technology IncDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 2020
- Baker v. Wright Medical Technology, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2020
- Craugh v. Wright Medical Technology IncDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 2020
- Craugh, Gary v. Wright Medical Technology, Inc.District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 2020
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.