Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-md-02144/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-md-02144-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 315
Nature of Suit: Airplane Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

Judge Heyburn, Judge Miller and Judge Trager did not participate in the disposition of this *

matter. 

 Airbus S.A.S.; Honeywell International, Inc.; Rockwell Collins, Inc.; Thales Avionics, S.A.; 1

Thales U.S.A., Inc.; Motorola, Inc.; Intel Corp.; Hamilton Sundstrand Corp.; General Electric Co.;

GE Aviation Systems, LLC; Rosemount Aerospace Inc.; E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Corp.; and

Raychem Corp. 

 The Southern District of Texas plaintiffs also acknowledge that the Northern District of 2

California is an appropriate transferee district.

 The parties have notified the Panel that 31 additional related actions are pending, 28 actions 3

in the Southern District of Florida, two actions in the Northern District of California, and one action

in the Southern District of Texas. These actions are potential tag-along actions. See Rules 7.4 and

7.5, R.P.J.P.M.L., 199 F.R.D. 425, 435-36 (2001).

UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL 

on 

MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

IN RE: AIR CRASH OVER THE MID-ATLANTIC

ON JUNE 1, 2009 MDL No. 2144

TRANSFER ORDER

Before the entire Panel : Certain defendants have moved, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, * 1

for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings of this litigation in the Southern District of

Texas. Plaintiffs in the Southern District of Texas action, plaintiff in a potentially-related action

pending in the Northern District of California, and defendant Société Air France (Air France) support

centralization in the Southern District of Texas. Plaintiffs in the Northern District of California and 2

Northern District of Illinois actions suggest centralization in the Northern District of California. 

This litigation currently consists of three actions listed on Schedule A and pending in three

districts, one action each in the Northern District of California, the Northern District of Illinois and

the Southern District of Texas.3

On the basis of the papers filed and hearing session held, we find that all actions before the

Panel involve common questions of fact and that centralization under Section 1407 in the Northern

District of California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just

and efficient conduct of this litigation. All actions concern the cause or causes of the crash of Air

France Flight 447 off the coast of Brazil on June 1, 2009. Centralization under Section 1407 will

eliminate duplicative discovery, prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings, and conserve the resources of

the parties, their counsel and the judiciary. 

Case 3:10-md-02144-CRB Document 1 Filed 04/14/10 Page 1 of 3
-2-

We are persuaded that the NorthernDistrict of California is an appropriate transferee district.

Three actions are now pending in that district, and two defendants maintain their principal places of

business within that district. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, the actions listed on

Schedule A and pending outside the Northern District of California are transferred to the Northern

District of California and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Charles R.

Breyer for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings with the action pending there and listed

on Schedule A.

PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

____________________________________

 Kathryn H. Vratil 

 Acting Chairman

John G. Heyburn II, Chairman Robert L. Miller, Jr. * *

David R. Hansen W. Royal Furgeson, Jr.

Frank C. Damrell, Jr. David G. Trager*

Case 3:10-md-02144-CRB Document 1 Filed 04/14/10 Page 2 of 3
IN RE: AIR CRASH OVER THE MID-ATLANTIC 

ON JUNE 1, 2009 MDL No. 2144 

SCHEDULE A

Northern District of California

Margita Gergelova, et al. v. Airbus S.A.S., et al., C.A. No. 3:09-5020

Northern District of Illinois

Rosilene Hemme, et al. v. Airbus S.A.S, et al., C.A. No. 1:09-7239

Southern District of Texas

Hampton Harris, et al. v. Societe Air France, et al., C.A. No. 4:09-3155

Case 3:10-md-02144-CRB Document 1 Filed 04/14/10 Page 3 of 3