Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 1, 2022

City of Chico, California v. McKinsey and Company, Inc.

Judge
Charles Breyer
Docket
3:22-cv-07642
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
3
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In City of Chico v. McKinsey, Judge Breyer was assigned the action after the panel conditionally transferred it for coordinated pretrial proceedings.

Who this affects

The City of Chico, California and McKinsey and Company, Inc.; their action was conditionally transferred for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings in the Northern District of California and assigned to Judge Charles R. Breyer.

What happened

The City of Chico, California v. McKinsey and Company, Inc. action was listed as a related case in multidistrict litigation concerning McKinsey’s work as a national prescription-opiate consultant. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation said the action involved factual questions shared with cases already transferred to the Northern District of California.

The panel ordered the action transferred under federal law for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. The order was conditional: it would not become effective until filed in the Northern District of California, and the transfer could be delayed if a party filed an opposition within seven days.

The order assigned the action, with that court’s consent, to Judge Charles R. Breyer. It addressed where and how the case would proceed before trial, not whether either side was right on the underlying claims.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
City of Chico, California v. McKinsey and Company, Inc. · No. 3:22-cv-07642
Judge
Charles Breyer
Date
Dec. 1, 2022

Background

This document is Conditional Transfer Order 35 in multidistrict litigation identified as In re: McKinsey & Company, Inc., National Prescription Opiate Consultant Litigation, MDL No. 2996. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation previously transferred 17 civil actions to the Northern District of California for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 1407. The panel stated that 132 additional actions had since been transferred there and assigned to Judge Charles R. Breyer.

Transfer Order

The panel listed the City of Chico, California v. McKinsey and Company, Inc. action as a tag-along action from the Eastern District of California, case number 22-01999. The panel found that the action appeared to involve factual questions common to actions previously transferred to the Northern District of California. It therefore ordered the action transferred under § 1407 for the reasons stated in the panel’s earlier transfer order and assigned it, with the Northern District of California’s consent, to Judge Breyer.

The order was conditional. It stated that it would not become effective until filed with the clerk of the Northern District of California. The transmittal was stayed for seven days after entry, and the stay would continue if a party filed a notice of opposition with the panel during that period.

Effect of the Order

The order concerns the location and coordination of pretrial proceedings. It does not decide the merits of the City of Chico’s claims or McKinsey’s defenses, and the document does not state any ruling on liability or other underlying legal issues.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.