McKinley v. Johnson & Johnson

Background

This was a transfer order from the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in In re: Fluoroquinolone Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2642. Bayer Corporation, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc., and Bayer HealthCare LLC moved under 28 U.S.C. § 1407(c) to transfer McKinley to the District of Minnesota for inclusion in the existing multidistrict litigation. The Janssen defendants supported transfer, and the plaintiff opposed it.

The plaintiff alleged that he used Levaquin and Cipro and consequently suffered, among other things, paresthesia and disabling pain. The opinion states that defendants and the MDL master complaint described paresthesia as a tingling or burning sensation in the extremities caused by nerve damage and as a key symptom of peripheral neuropathy. The plaintiff also allegedly suffered mitochondrial damage and a group of symptoms called Fluoroquinolone Associated Disability Syndrome. He identified 40 conditions, including mental-health and sleep disorders, musculoskeletal and cardiovascular injuries, and damage to other body systems.

Arguments and analysis

The Panel found common factual questions between McKinley and the MDL cases. Those questions included general causation, the biological mechanism of the alleged injury, background science, and common regulatory issues concerning fluoroquinolone antibiotics and the risk of peripheral neuropathy.

The plaintiff argued that his injuries were too numerous and varied to fit the narrower peripheral-neuropathy issues in the MDL. The Panel rejected that argument, relying on prior transfer orders holding that additional unrelated injuries did not prevent transfer when an action also raised common issues concerning peripheral neuropathy. The Panel also noted that the MDL’s pretrial proceedings had accommodated injuries beyond peripheral neuropathy.

The Panel considered the advanced stage of the MDL and concluded that continued transfer of tag-along actions remained appropriate because the transferee court was actively managing pretrial proceedings in unresolved cases, including pretrial motions and discovery obligations. It determined that transfer would likely promote common discovery, motions, and other pretrial proceedings.

Ruling

The Panel ordered that the action listed on Schedule A be transferred to the District of Minnesota and, with that court’s consent, assigned to the Honorable John R. Tunheim for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. The order also stated that the action could later be returned to the transferor court under § 1407 if continued inclusion no longer served convenience or efficiency.

The provided metadata identifies Saundra Armstrong as the judge, but the opinion text presents the ruling as an order of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation and does not identify Judge Armstrong as the decision-maker.