Full opinion text
TRANSFER ORDER JOHN F. NANGLE, Chairman. This litigation presently consist of the 173 actions listed on the following Schedule A and pending in eleven federal districts as follows: District of Minnesota 144 actions District of Kansas 11 actions Western District of Virginia 4 actions Southern District of Ohio 3 actions District of South Carolina 3 actions Eastern District of Wisconsin 3 actions Southern District of Florida 1 action Northern District of Georgia 1 action District of New Jersey 1 action Eastern District of Pennsylvania 1 action Western District of Pennsylvania 1 action Before the Panel are three separate motions by various groups of plaintiffs for an order of the Panel, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, centralizing all actions in a single district for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. Moving plaintiffs suggest one of the following districts as the transferee court: the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the District of New Jersey or the District of Kansas. All non-moving plaintiffs in the actions before the Panel have filed responses in support of centralization in one of these three districts. Defendants E.I. du Pont de Nem-ours and Company (DuPont), Dow Corning Corporation, Dow Corning Wright Corporation, The Dow Chemical Company and Corning Incorporated oppose centralization. If the Panel nevertheless orders centralization, some of these defendants suggest the following districts as alternative transferee forums: the Northern District of California, the District of Arizona, the District of Minnesota, the District of Connecticut or the Eastern District of Michigan. On the basis of the papers filed and the hearing held, the Panel finds that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of fact and that centralization under Section 1407 in the District of Minnesota will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation. All actions before the Panel are personal injury actions brought by individuals who have been implanted with temporomandibular joint (TMJ) implants. Common factual questions arise in these actions with respect to, inter alia, i)- whether the TMJ implants are defective and unreasonably dangerous, ii) whether defendants failed to adequately test the implants and constituent materials or warn of possible risks to TMJ implant recipients, and iii) whether the implants’ various constituent materials are prone to break down in recipients’ bodies. Centralization under Section 1407 is necessary in order to eliminate dupli-cative discovery, prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings (especially with respect to class certifications and summary judgments), and conserve the resources of the parties, their counsel and the judiciary. None of the eight federal districts suggested as transferee forums by various parties could be characterized as the center of gravity for this litigation. On balance, however, we are persuaded that the District of Minnesota is the appropriate transferee forum. We note that 1) well over 100 TMJ implant actions have been commenced in that district during the past five years; 2) Judge Paul A. Magnuson, to whom we are assigning this litigation, has presided in a number of these actions, has entered important pretrial rulings, and is therefore familiar with the issues in this docket; and 3) Minnesota is a geographically central and accessible location for this nationwide litigation. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, the actions listed on the following Schedule A and pending in districts other than the District of Minnesota be, and the same hereby are, transferred to the District of Minnesota and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Paul A. Magnuson for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings with the actions pending in that district and listed on Schedule A. SCHEDULE A MDL-1001 — In re Temporomandibular Joint (TMJ) Implants Products Liability Litigation Southern District of Florida Barbara Jacobs Corente v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 1:92-729 Northern District of Georgia Linda Greene v. Dow Corning Corp., C.A. No. 1:93-2647 District of Kansas Paula Powers v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 6:93-1398 Bonnie Dyess v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 6:93-1399 Gynile Grigg v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 6:93-1400 Joan Tholen v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 6:93-1401 Wanda Perry v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 6:93-1402 Lois Allin v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 6:93-1407 Deborah A. Yeamans v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 6:93-1414 Daniel Bender v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 6:93-1417 Rosetta A Almon v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 6:93-1442 Mary Luckeroth v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 6:93-1443 Mary Margaret Booth v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 6:93-1444 District of New Jersey Constance Greco, et al. v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 2:93-1587 District of Minnesota Barbara Monsaas v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:89-385 Karen Anderson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:89-439 Colleen Sacco v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:89-440 Eileen Bentzen v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:89-595 Julia Carey v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:89-596 Denise Hedlund v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:89-597 Ann Dietz v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:89-711 Angela T. Johnson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:89-713 Ruth Greengo v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:89-714 Karen Polnau v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:89-715 Joan Stainbrook v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:89-716 Ellen Hart-Shegos v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:89-717 Patricia Jo Mingus v,. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-131 Melania Barnes v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-132 Brenda Gnette v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-197 Don Doty v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-198 Elizabeth Birk v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-307 Aarah Aizman v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-399 Ann O’Phelan v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-402 Natalie Krick v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-484 Mary Tvedt v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-573 Colleen Lindabauer v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-592 Susan Stevens v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-593 Charlotte Copiskey v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-594 Marsha Thaldorf v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-595 Kelly Dickinson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-596 Barbara Dembroski v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-633 Kathleen Connolly v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-641 Lisa Parenteau-Houlton v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-642 Paula Russell v. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-643 Lorna Graf v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-666 Sandra Brandtner v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-667 Kathy Dockendorf v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-693 Joann Hovde v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-695 Mary Ann Henderson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-696 Rachel Anthony v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-698 Rosemary Rust v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-699 Mary Beth Lemke v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-700 Yvonne Haengi v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:90-728 Michelle S. Vandenheuvel v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-10 Rose Svoboda v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-26 Charlene Foltz v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-27 Susan Falvey Howe v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-28 Marcia Herman v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-29 Melba Honebrink v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-30 Marilyn J. Humphrey v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-31 George Clemens v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-33 Trudy Rudd v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-34 Denise Stritesky v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-36 Betty McConnell v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-146 Melanie Humenansky v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-147 Sharon Sneen v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-190 Karen Wallraf v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-192 Angela Pederson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-193 Janet Sward v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-194 Georgia Lambert v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-226 Susan Johnson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-350 Mick Gapay v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-352 Lori Rangas v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-353 Melissa Crews v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-354 Candace Carman v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-356 Debra Kannel v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-357 Judy Kokorendz v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-358 Camella Festa v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-360 Dave Shinnick v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-373 Jenie Mohr v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-374 Susan Marie Hartfiel v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:91-784 Kathleen Gauss v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:92-497 Kathy Heim v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:93-279 Angela Sele v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 3:93-754 Linda Groen v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-383 Trudy Lamb v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-395 Donald Benson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-473 Gary Kittleson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-494 Linda Klima v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-495 Karen Holicky v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-521 Carol Barnhart v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-522 Susan Pohl v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-607 Margaret Knox v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-608 Bonnie Brazil v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-633 Colleen Jefferson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-634 Susan Halverson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-635 Debra Ettle v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-636 Arlene Bernstein v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-708 LaVon Whalen v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-711 Dorothea Hayes-Hanson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-714 Mary Jo Baker v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-742 Janette Schull v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-773 Barbara Olson v. E.I. Du, Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-774 Terri Engh v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-787 Laurie Anderson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-838 Gertrude Rau v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-839 Nancy Rojas v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-840 Shirley Donahue v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-909 Julie Bloomquist v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-910 Karen Dziuk v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-911 David Walczak v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-912 Melba Gamble v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-918 Dorothy Dragich v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-919 Virginie Grenges v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-920 Mary Ann Joyce v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-921 Catherine Steele v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:90-938 Barbara Garey v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-40 Mary Baringer v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-41 Carol Fetzer v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-42 Trudy Day v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-43 Mary G. Lamirande v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Go., C.A. No. 4:91-45 Linda Courteau v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-46 Jan Redenius v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-47 Dianne Zivilling v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-48 Ronald Mechura v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-^49 Kathy Wallack v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-51 Mary Anundson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-52 Carolyn Wasley v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-57 Edna Domfeld v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-184 Beverly Hosea v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-185 Linda Gilligan v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-250 Richard Schade v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-253 Sheila Grover v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-254 Debra Giles v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-255 Kimberly Cody v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-256 Priscilla Betsinger v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-257 Heloise Poye v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-258 June Arent v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-259 Joyce Albert v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-260 Edward Bramlage v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-261 Delores Parrott v. E.I. Du Pont De Nem-ours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-262 Donna Leland v. E.I. Du Pont De Nem-ours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-263 Patricia Jotblad v. E.I. Du Pont De Nem-ours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-264 Pamela Endreson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-265 Marleme Goligowski v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-430 Joyce Halligan v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-431 Lori Warme v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-432 Tawnia McKennon v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-433 Lillian Davis v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-434 Mary Kay Kenney v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-435 Ann Becker v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-436 Thomas Carlson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-449 Joy M. Elicerio v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-850 Rhonda Amon v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91-987 Kathleen M. Schwartzbauer v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:91—988 Mary Ann Caroline v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:92-91 Karen Foss v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., C.A. No. 4:92-92 Donna Carlson v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours Co., C.A. No. 4:92-99 Southern District of Ohio Susan Hanigan v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 1:93-786 Regina Usenick v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., et al., C.A. No. 1:93-787 Terry L. Hergenrather v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., et al., C.A. No. 1:93-788 Eastern District of Pennsylvania S.C. Kulp v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., et al., C.A. No. 2:93-2723 Western District of Pennsylvania Catherine Bebko v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., et al., C.A. No. 1:93-319 District of South Carolina Anita J. Lee v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 2:93-3006 Dorothy Campbell v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 2:93-3007 Debbie Hinshaw v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 2:93-3008 Western District of Virginia Louise M. Hodor v. Dow Corning Corp., C.A. No. 3:93-68 Christopher M. Murphy v. Dow Corning Corp., C.A. No. 3:93-69 Deborah K. Shupe v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., et al., C.A. No. 3:93-70 Julie Young v. Dow Corning Corp., C.A. No. 3:93-71 Eastern District of Wisconsin Mary Beth Pince v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 2:93-1211 Monica Barrett, et al. v. Dow Corning Corp., et al., C.A. No. 2:93-1212 Terrie Cowley, et al. v. Dow Corning Corp., C.A. No. 2:93-1213 . The Section 1407 motions included one additional action — Mary E. Baker v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., M.D. Pennsylvania, C.A. No. 4:92-1126 — that was closed in the Middle District of Pennsylvania on February 7, 1994. Accordingly, the question of Section 1407 transfer of that action is now moot. . The Panel has also been notified that more than 50 additional related actions are pending in more than 20 federal districts. These actions, and any other actions that come to the Panel’s attention, will be treated as potential tag-along actions. See Rules 12 and 13, R.P.J.P.M.L., 147 F.R.D. 589, 596-97 (1993). . In addition to the three Section 1407 motions that are the subject of this transfer order, two other motions are before the Panel in this docket. The first motion, by plaintiffs in certain Northern District of California actions for Section 1407 centralization in that district, was filed too late to be considered by the Panel at its hearing on January 21, 1994. Any actions included in that motion and not presently before the Panel will be treated as potential tag-along actions (see note 2, supra). The second motion, filed by defendant DuPont, seeks an order of the Panel 1) striking from public records and sealing two allegedly confidential documents included as exhibits in two pleadings (identified in Panel official files as Pleadings No. 15 and No. 27) filed with the Panel by the law firm of Ness, Motley, Loadholt, Richardson & Poole (Ness Motley) on behalf of plaintiffs in thirteen actions; and 2) directing the return to DuPont of all copies of the documents in possession of counsel on the Panel Attorney Service List, parties or persons to whom the documents may have been provided, unless those individuals have executed a confidentiality agreement with DuPont. This motion is opposed by Ness Motley on the ground that the documents were in the public domain when obtained by Ness Motley. The Clerk of the Panel has maintained the two documents under seal from the date of filing of DuPont’s motion, and she will continue to do so. Any further request for relief by DuPont in this matter should be directed to the court from which Ness Motley obtained the documents (the Middle District of Tennessee), the MDL-1001 transferee court (the District of Minnesota), or any other appropriate court.