Molina Healthcare, Inc. v. Actavis Elizabeth, LLC
- Edward Chen
- 3:19-cv-08438
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Molina Healthcare v. Actavis Elizabeth, Judge Chen’s case was conditionally transferred to Pennsylvania for coordinated pretrial proceedings.
Molina Healthcare, Inc., Actavis Elizabeth, LLC, and the parties to the related actions included in the multidistrict litigation were affected by the conditional transfer for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.
What happened
Molina Healthcare, Inc. v. Actavis Elizabeth, LLC was listed as a related action in multidistrict litigation involving generic-pharmaceutical pricing. The Judicial Panel said the case shared factual questions with actions already pending in Pennsylvania.
The Panel conditionally transferred the case from the Northern District of California to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania under federal multidistrict-litigation law. The cases were assigned to Judge Cynthia M. Rufe for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.
The order did not become effective immediately and allowed seven days for a party to oppose the transfer. Judge Edward Chen is identified in the supplied case information, although the opinion text itself is a Judicial Panel transfer order.
The detailed version
- Molina Healthcare, Inc. v. Actavis Elizabeth, LLC · No. 3:19-cv-08438
- Edward Chen
- Feb. 5, 2020
Background
The United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation issued Conditional Transfer Order CTO-10 in the multidistrict litigation titled In re: Generic Pharmaceuticals Pricing Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 2724. The schedule identified Molina Healthcare, Inc. v. Actavis Elizabeth, LLC et al. as a related action from the Northern District of California.
The Panel stated that the case involved factual questions common to actions previously transferred to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. Those proceedings had been assigned, with the transferee court’s consent, to Judge Cynthia M. Rufe.
Ruling
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1407, the Panel conditionally transferred the action to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and assigned it to Judge Rufe. The transfer order would become effective only when filed with the clerk of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The Panel stayed transmission of the order for seven days from entry; a notice of opposition filed during that period would continue the stay until the Panel issued a further order.
The order addressed case management and venue for pretrial proceedings. It did not decide the parties’ underlying antitrust claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.