Legal Opinion

In re Telecommunications Providers' Fiber Optic Cable Installation Litigation

United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation

Decided August 8, 2011No. MDL No. 2271PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER DENYING TRANSFER

JOHN G. HEYBURN II, Chairman.

Before the Panel:* Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, eleven plaintiffs, who are *1365among the plaintiffs in eight actions, move for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings of 29 actions pending in 25 districts as listed on Schedule A.1 All responding plaintiffs and defendants oppose the motion.

One plaintiff in the District of North Dakota action suggests centralization in the District of North Dakota if the Panel orders centralization over his objection. Over 50 other responding plaintiffs propose centralization in the District of Idaho, the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In Re Wireless Telephone Radio Frequency Emissions Products Liability LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2001
  2. In Re Power Balance, LLC, Marketing & Sales Practices LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2011
  3. In Re Telecommunication Providers' Fiber Optic Cable Installation LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2002

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Cascade Corp. v. Sprint Communications Co.District Court, D. Maine · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API