Racine Unified School District v. JUUL Labs Inc
- William Orrick
- 3:22-cv-01439
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Racine Unified School District v. JUUL Labs Inc, Judge Orrick’s court received the case for coordinated pretrial proceedings under a multidistrict transfer order.
Racine Unified School District and the other parties to the listed action were affected by the transfer to the Northern District of California for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.
What happened
Racine Unified School District v. JUUL Labs Inc was listed as a related case involving factual questions common to other JUUL cases already being handled together in federal court.
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ordered the case transferred from the Eastern District of Wisconsin to the Northern District of California for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. The order did not decide the parties’ underlying claims.
The case was assigned to Judge William Orrick. The order became effective when filed with the Northern District of California clerk, subject to a seven-day period for objections.
The detailed version
- Racine Unified School District v. JUUL Labs Inc · No. 3:22-cv-01439
- William Orrick
- Mar. 7, 2022
Background
This was a conditional transfer order issued by the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in the JUUL Labs marketing, sales-practices, and products-liability litigation. The listed action was filed in the Eastern District of Wisconsin and captioned Racine Unified School District v. JUUL Labs Inc et al.
The Panel said the action appeared to involve factual questions common to cases previously transferred to the Northern District of California for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. Those cases had been assigned, with that court’s consent, to Judge William H. Orrick.
Ruling
The Panel transferred the action under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to the Northern District of California and assigned it to Judge Orrick for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. The order did not resolve the merits of the claims or defenses. It stated that the transfer would become effective when filed with the Northern District of California clerk and that transmission would be stayed for seven days to allow objections.
Effect
The order moved the case to the Northern District of California as part of the multidistrict proceedings. It addressed case management and pretrial coordination only; the opinion text does not state any ruling on liability, damages, or the parties’ substantive claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.