Legal Opinion

In re Thomas E. Noble Litigation

United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation

Decided December 7, 2016No. MDL No. 2745Published

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER DENYING TRANSFER

Sarah S. Vance, Chair

Before the Panel:* Plaintiff Thomas E. Noble moves under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to centralize two actions in an “impartial” *1333district outside the Third Circuit.1 The actions, which are listed on the attached Schedule A, are pending in the District of Delaware and the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Plaintiff also asks the Panel to reopen certain cases previously closed in the District of Delaware. No defendants responded to the Section 1407 motion.2

After considering plaintiffs arguments, we deny centralization. The two actions have little, if any, factual…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. In Re Glenn W. Turner Enterprises LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 1973
  2. In re KissiUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2013
  3. Rodriguez v. ShulmanUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2011
  4. In re Wells Fargo Inspection Fee LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API