Lyon v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc.
- Phyllis Hamilton
- 4:19-cv-05270
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Lyon v. DePuy, Judge Hamilton’s case concerns a panel order transferring the hip-implant lawsuit to coordinated proceedings in Texas.
Lyon and the DePuy defendants were affected by the transfer of the case from the Northern District of California to the Northern District of Texas for coordinated pretrial proceedings.
What happened
Lyon v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. involves a plaintiff’s request to undo the transfer of her lawsuit to multidistrict proceedings concerning DePuy Pinnacle hip implants. She alleged that the implant caused high chromium and cobalt levels and required revision surgery.
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation found common factual questions with other cases and concluded that transfer would promote convenience and efficient litigation. It also stated that concerns about federal jurisdiction did not justify undoing the transfer; the plaintiff could ask the receiving judge to send the case back.
The Panel ordered the case transferred to the Northern District of Texas and assigned it to Judge James E. Kinkeade for coordinated pretrial proceedings. The supplied case information identifies Judge Phyllis Hamilton, although the transfer order itself was issued by the Panel.
The detailed version
- Lyon v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. · No. 4:19-cv-05270
- Phyllis Hamilton
- Dec. 18, 2019
Background
The plaintiff in the Northern District of California action, identified as Lyon, moved under Panel Rule 7.1 to vacate, or undo, a conditional order transferring her case to multidistrict litigation (MDL) No. 2244. The DePuy defendants opposed the motion.
The case concerns alleged injuries from a DePuy Pinnacle Acetabular Cup System hip implant. The opinion states that Lyon alleged the implant caused high blood chromium and cobalt levels and required revision surgery. The defendants identified in the order include DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc., now known as Medical Device Business Services, Inc.; Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc.; Johnson & Johnson; DePuy International Limited; and DePuy Products, Inc.
Analysis
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation found that the action involved common factual questions with cases already transferred to MDL No. 2244. The Panel concluded that transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 would promote convenience for the parties and witnesses and the just and efficient conduct of the litigation. It also relied on its earlier determination that the Northern District of Texas was an appropriate forum for cases involving alleged injuries from DePuy Pinnacle hip implants.
Lyon argued that transfer was improper because federal jurisdiction was lacking. The Panel stated that pending jurisdictional objections do not justify vacating a transfer order. It explained that Lyon could present a request to remand, meaning to send the case back, to the judge overseeing the MDL proceedings. The order did not decide whether federal jurisdiction actually existed.
Disposition
The Panel ordered the action transferred to the Northern District of Texas, with that court’s consent, and assigned it to Judge James E. Kinkeade for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. The order therefore transferred the case rather than vacating the conditional transfer. The supplied case information identifies Judge Phyllis Hamilton, but the text of this order identifies the Judicial Panel as the issuing body rather than Judge Hamilton.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.