Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-md-02741/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-md-02741-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability

---

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE: ROUNDUP PRODUCTS 

LIABILITY LITIGATION

This document relates to:

ALL ACTIONS

MDL No. 2741

Case No. 16-md-02741-VC 

PRETRIAL ORDER NO. 8:

ORDER REQUESTING BRIEFING

RE RELEVANCE OF EPA AND IARC

It appears the plaintiffs are preparing to argue that the EPA's conclusions about the 

carcinogenicity of glyphosate are flawed and/or biased. It appears Monsanto is preparing to 

argue the same with respect to IARC. It's not obvious how directly relevant these arguments are 

to the questions the Court must consider during the general-causation phase of this case, which 

will presumably focus on expert testimony about actual studies (as opposed to reviews conducted 

and conclusions drawn by various agencies about those studies). Accordingly, the Court orders 

the parties to submit briefing discussing: (1) whether alleged flaws and/or biases in EPA or 

IARC methods, studies, reports, or conclusions are relevant to general causation; and (2) if so, 

what material is needed to assess allegations about those flaws and/or biases. The parties should 

cite any authority that speaks to these questions, regardless of whether that authority is favorable 

or unfavorable to their respective positions.

Briefing will be limited to 15 pages per side and should be filed no later than February 8, 

2017. Oppositions and replies will not be accepted unless otherwise ordered.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 25, 2017

______________________________________

VINCE CHHABRIA

United States District Judge

Case 3:16-md-02741-VC Document 120 Filed 01/25/17 Page 1 of 1