2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 11-30-2005 

# In Re: D iet D rugs P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 03-3401

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" In Re: Die t Dr u gs " (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 177. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/177P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N os . 03- 3401, 03- 3402, 03- 4465 & 04- 3661
I N R E: DI ET DR UG S ( PHEN TERM I NE/ FENFLURA M I NE/ DEX FENFLURA M I NE) P RO DUC T S L I AB I L I T Y L I T I GAT I ON C l ar a C l ark, L i nda Sm artand al l other cl as s m ember s r epr es ent ed byFl emi ng & A s s o c ia te s , L .L .P ., A ppel l ant s i n N o. 03- 3401 H ar i t on & D ' A ngel o, L L P and N a po l i , K a i s e r , Bern & A s s oc i a t e s , LLP, on behal f of themsel ves , cl ai m ant J ames A xfor d and s i m i l ar l ys i tuat ed cl as s m ember s r epr es ent ed bythe Ha r i t o n a n d Na p o l i F i r ms wh o s e c l a i ms ar e af fec t ed byPr etr i al O r derN o. 2929, A ppel l ant s i n N o. 03- 3402 S h a n n e W e b b -C o c h ra n , R e n a i K u yk e n d a ll, W i l l a Sart i n, D aw n St ew artand J oanne V al ent i , on behal f of themsel ves2 and al l othercl as s m ember s w ho have i nges t ed fe n- phen and w ho s uffe r , or w il l suf fe r, fro m elev ated p u lm o n ary hypert ens i on nots econda ryt o val vul ar

heartdi s eas e, A ppel l ant s i n N o. 03- 4465 D o r i s W e l l e ra n d E l l e n C a r e y, w hos e cl ai m s ar e af fec t ed by Pr etr i al O r derN o. 3849, A ppel l ant s i n N o. 04- 3661

A p p ea ls from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( M D L N o. 1203) D istri ct Ju d g e: H o n o rab le H arv eyB artl e, II I

__________________ A r gued on A pr i l 22, 2005 B e f o re : R O T H , F U E N T E S a n d S T A P L E T O N , C irc u it

Judg es. ( Fi l ed: N ovember30, 2005) T h o ma s C. Go l d s t e i n , E s q u i r e ( AR GUE D)

Go l d s t e i n & Ho we3 4 6 0 7 A s b u ryP l a c e , N . W. W as hi ngt on, D . C . 20016 Ho wa r d I . L a n g e r , E s q u i r e ( AR GUE D)

L anger& G r ogr am 1600 M arketStr eet , Sui t e 2020 Phi l adel phi a, PA 19103 S y lvia D av ido w , E sq u ir e Fl emi ng & A s s oci at es 1330 PostO ak B l vd. , Sui t e 3030 H ous t on, T X 77056 M ario D ’A n g elo, E sq u ir e H a rito n & D ’A n g e lo 3500 Sunr i s e H i ghw ay , Sui t e T-207 G r eatR i ver , N Y 11739 P au l J. N ap o li , E sq u ir e D en ise A . R u b in, E sq u ir e N apol i , K ai s er , B ern & A s s oci at es 3500 Sunr i s e H i ghw ay , Sui t e T-207 G r eatR i ver , N Y 11739 C o u n se l f

o r A p p e llan ts Ro b e r tD. Ro s e n b a u m, E s q u i r e ( AR GUE D)

A rnol d & Por t er 5 5 5 1 2 S tr e e t , N . W.

th W as hi ngt on, D C 200044 P eter L . Z im roth , E sq u ir e A rnol d & Por t er 399 Par k A venue N ew Y or k, N Y 10022- 4690 Jo h n J. C u m m ing s, III , E sq u ir e C um m i ngs , C um m i ngs & D udenhef er 416 G r avi erSt r eet N ew O r l eans , L A 70130 S a mu e l I s s a c h a r o f

f , E s q u i r e ( AR GUE D) N ew Y or k U ni ver s i tyL aw School 4 0 W a sh in g to n S q u a re S o u th N ew Y or k, N Y 10012 M i c h a e l D. F i s h b e i n , E s q u i r e ( AR GUE D) F red S . L o n g er, E sq u ir e A rno ld L ev in, E sq u ir e L evi n, Fi s hbei n, Sedr an & B erm an 510 W al nutSt r eet , Sui t e 500 Phi l adel phi a, PA 19106 C ouns el forA ppel l ees

OP I NI ONIn M a rc h 2 0 0 2 , the m a n u f a c tu re r o f

th e d ru g s in 1 q u e stio n c h a n g e d it s n a m e f ro m A m e ric a n H o m e P ro d u c ts to W y eth. W e w i l l r efe rt o i tas W y eth. 5 RO TH , C i r cui tJ udge: T h e se a p p e a ls a rise f

ro m th e D istric t C o u rt’s e f f o rts to over s ee the N at i onw i de C l as s A ct i on Set t l ementA gr eement in th e m u lti -d istric t (M D L ) 1 2 0 3 lit ig a tio n b e tw e e n W y e th 1 and a c l as s compri s i ng form erus er s of W y eth’ s di et
m edi cat i ons , fenf

l ur ami ne and de xfenf

l ur ami ne. T hi s appea l i s the cons ol i dat i on of cha l l enges bythr ee di ffe r entgr oups of A ppel l ant s , al l cl ai m i ng thattheys houl d notbe bound bythe Set t l ementA gr eement . Forthe r eas ons di s cus s ed, w e fi nd thatal l thr ee gr oups of A ppel l ant s ar e bound bythe S ett lem en t A g ree m en t and w e w il l aff irm the D istri ct C o u rt ’s deci s i on. I . The Se t t l e m e nt A gr e e m e nt“FD A Posi t i ve V H D ” r efe r s t o a s ever i tyof hea r tval ve 2 re g u rg ita tio n , a s d e f

in e d in th e S e ttle m e n t A g re e m e n t.

6 T he hi s t oryof thi s cas e i s det ai l ed i n I n r e D i etD rugs Pr ods . L i ab. L i t i g. , 282 F. 3d 220, 225- 29 ( 3d C i r . 2002) and
w ill o n lyb e b rie f

lysu m m a riz e d h e re . In 1 9 9 9 , W y e th
r eac hed a s ett l ementthatpr ovi ded a va r i etyof r emedi es for
us er s and form erus er s of i t s di etm edi cat i ons . T he D i s tr i ct C our tappr oved the pl an i n Pr etr i al O r der1415 and the
acc om pany i ng m emora ndum . T he r emedi es pr ovi ded d e p e n d e d o n w h e th e r th e c las s m e m b e rs w e re u lti m a tely d ia g n o s e d w ith o n e o f

s e v e ra l h e a rt c o n d itio n s . E a c h c la s s m e m b e r w a s p la c e d in to o n e o f f iv e g ro u p s . C l as s 1 cons i s t ed of c l as s m ember s w ho di d notknow
w hethertheyhad a c ondi t i on t erm ed FD A pos i t i ve ventr i cul ar heartdis ease ( V H D ) , and w as further subd i vided i nto cl ass 2
m e m b e r s w h o h a d u s e d th e d i e td ru g s f o rm o r e th a n 6 0 d a ys7 and cl as s m ember s w ho had us ed the drugs forl es s than 60 day s . C l as s 2 cons i s t ed of c l as s m ember s w ho knew theyhad FD A pos i t i ve V H D and w as al s o s ubdi vi ded bas ed on di et drug us age of

m or e orl es s than 60 day s . C l as s 3 w as compri s ed of c l as s m ember s w ho di d notknow w hetherthey h ad F D A p o sit ive V H D at th e ti m e o f se tt lem en t, b u t w ere di agnos ed w i th a l es s s er i ous condi t i on cal l ed mi l d m i tr al
r egur gi t at i on bythe end of the s ett l ements cr eeni ng per i od. T h e se ttl e m e n t p ro v id e d f u n d in g f o r sc re e n in g tes ts to determ i ne w hethercl ass m em bers had q uali fy i ng heartdis ease and forcompensa t i on forthe cos tof the drugs and medi cal tr eatm ent , dependi ng on the ul t i m at e di agnos i s . T he S et t l em ent A greem ent express l ybarr ed p art i ci pati ng cl ass m ember s fr om pur s ui ng anys ett l ed cl ai m s agai ns tW y eth. T h e se tt lem en t pro v ided the o p ti o n fo r class m em b ers t o optoutatthe t i m e of s ett l ement( “i ni t i al optout s ”) ort o be8 b o u n d b ythe S ett lem en t A g ree m en t. T h o se c lass m em b ers d iag n o se d a s h a v in g F D A p o sitiv e V H D b ya sp e c if ied d a te coul d ei therr egi s t erforfur therbenef i t s orexer ci s e an

“ in te rm e d ia te o p t o u t” a n d s u e W y e th in th e s ta te to rt s y s te m . I n addi t i on, thos e cl as s m ember s di agnos ed as havi ng a l es s er c o n d iti o n , m ild m itral re g u rg itatio n , co u ld e ith e r c laim compensa t i on underthe s ett l ementorexer ci s e a “ back e nd
o p t ou t” an d su e W y eth in the to rtsy stem . T h e c lass m em b ers w h o ex erc ised interm ed iat e o r ba ck en d o p t ou ts are co ll ec ti v elyref

erred to as “d o w n str ea m o p t ou ts. ” In excha nge forW y eth’ s w ai verof a s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons d e f e n se , cla ss m e m b e rs e x e rc isin g d o w n stre a m o p t o u t rig h ts cann ot s ue fo r punit i ve d am ages. T he S et t l em ent A greem ent expl i ci t l yexcluded tho se ind ividu als w ith a m o re se ri o u s co n d it ion , p ri m aryp u lm o n ary hypert ens i on ( “PPH ”) , al l ow i ng them t o s ue W y eth i n the9 stat e tort sy stem . T h e se tt lem en t did n o t i n clud e a n yrec o v ery forpl ai nt i ffs al l egi ng a var i etyof condi t i ons , i ncl udi ng n eu roto x ici tyan d elev ated p u lm o n aryh yp erten sion (“P H ”), beca us e the D i s tr i ctC our tfound thatthe evi dence di d not supp orta con necti on betw een the use of dietdrugs an d these
con dit i on s. I I . Juri s di ct i on and St andard of R evi ew W e have j ur i s di ct i on overPr etr i al O r der s 2929, 3849
an d 3 0 8 5 b ec au se th eyare all fin al ord ers o f th e D istri ct C o u rt
w ith in th e m e a n in g o f

2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . T h e D istric t C o u rt’s le g a l co n c lu sio n s a re su b jec t to pl enaryr evi ew . I n r e Prudent i al I ns . C o. of A m . Sal es Pr act i ces L i t i g. , 261 F. 3d 355, 363 ( 3d C i r . 2001) . W e r evi ew the D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s det erm i nat i on of ade quacyof
re p re se n tatio n a s a n e x e rc ise o f its d isc re tio n a rya u th o rityin class a cti o n p roc ee d ing s fo r ab u se o f d iscreti o n . In re10 Prudent i al I ns . C o. of A m . Sal es Pr act i ces L i t i g. , 148 F. 3d 2 8 4 , 2 9 9 (3d C ir . 1 9 9 8 ). A ll u n d erly ing fa ctua l i ssu es a re re v ie w e d f

o r c le a r e rr o r. I d .

I I I . D ue P roce s s P rot ect i ons f or C l as s M em bers I n al l thr ee a ppeal s befor e us , A ppel l ant s ar gue that th e ya re n o t b o u n d b yth e S e ttl e m e n t A g re e m e n t b e c a u se th e ir due pr oces s r i ght s w er e notuphel d, ei therbeca us e of in a d e q u a te n o tice o r in a d e q u a te r e p re se n tatio n . A th re sh o ld qu est i on i n all three of these appea l s i s w hetherthese A ppel l ant s ar e ent i t l ed t o br i ng a col l at er al att ack on the S e ttle m e n t A g re e m e n t. A cl ass m em ber m usthav e cert ai n d ue p rocess pr ot ect i ons i n or dert o be bound bya cl as s s ett l ement agr eement . T he gene r al pr i nci pl e i s that“ther e has been a fai l ur e of due pr oces s onl yi n thos e ca s es w her e i tcannotbe11 s ai d t hatthe pr ocedur e adopt ed, fai r l yi ns ur es the pr ot ect i on of the i nt er es t s of abs entpart i es w ho ar e t o be bound byi t . ” H an sb erryv . L ee , 3 1 1 U . S . 3 2 , 4 2 (19 4 0 ). In a class w h ere o p t o u t rig h ts a re a f

f o rd e d , the se p ro tec tio n s a re a d e q u a te repr esent at i on bythe clas s r epresent at i ves, no t i ce of the clas s p ro c e e d in g s, a n d th e o p p o rtu n ityto b e h e a rd a n d p a rticip a te i n the cl ass pr oceed i ng s. P hil l i ps P et rol eum C o. v. S hu t t s, 472 U . S. 797, 811- 12 ( 1985) . T he ade quat e r epr es ent at i on r equi r ement“s erves t o uncoverconfl i ct s of i nt er es tbetw een named par t i es and the cl as s theys eek t o r epr es ent . ” A m chem P ro d u c ts, In c . v . W in d so r, 5 2 1 U .S . 5 9 1 , 6 2 5 (1 9 9 7 ). T h is
r equi r ementi s codi fi ed i n Fed. R . C i v. P. 23( a) ( 4) , w hi ch
r equi r es that“the r epr es ent at i ve part i es w i l l fai r l yand adequa t el ypr ot ectthe i nt er es t s of the cl as s . ” T here m ustbe a p rocess byw hich an i nd i vidual cl ass m emberorgr oup of cl as s m ember s can c hal l enge w hether12 thes e due pr oces s pr ot ect i ons w er e af for ded t o them. G r i m es v . V it ali n k C o m m ’ns C o rp., 1 7 F . 3 d 1 5 5 3 , 1 5 5 8 (3d C ir . 1994) . T hi s chal l enge c an t ake the form of an a ppeal of the
c l a s s c e r t i f

i c a t i o n i t s e l f

, a c o l l a t e r a l a t t a c k o n a n a l r e a d yc e rtifie d c las s, o r a R u le 6 0 (b ) m o tio n . In re R e a l E sta te T itl e & Set t l ementSer vs . A nt i trus tL i t i g. , 869 F. 2d 760, 767 ( 3d C ir . 1 9 8 9 ). C l as s m ember s ar e not , how ever , ent i t l ed t o unl i m i t ed att acks on t he cl as s s ett l ement . O nce a courthas deci ded that the d ue p rocess prot ect i on s di d o ccur for a part i cularcl ass m emberorgr oup of cl as s m ember s , the i s s ue maynotbe
r el i t i gat ed. A ppel l ant s under s t andabl yr el yheavi l yon S teph en so n v . D o w C h em ical C o . , 2 7 3 F . 3 d 2 4 9 (2d C ir . 2 0 0 1 ), a ff’d b ye q u a llyd iv id e d C o u rt, 5 3 9 U .S . 1 1 1 (2 0 0 3 ), in
su p p o rt o f

th e ir in sis ten c e th a t th e yh a v e a rig h t to c o llate ra lly att ack the ade quacyof r epr es ent at i on det erm i nat i on of the13 class a cti o n co u rt . W h il e S teph en so n su p p o rt s ap p ell an t’ s pos i t i on on thi s i s s ue, i ti s i ncons i s t entw i th ci r cui tcas e l aw byw hi ch thi s panel i s bound. I n C ar l ough v. A m chem Pr oduct s , I nc . , 10 F. 3d 189 ( 3d C i r . 1993) , w e hel d thatnot i ce and fa i l ur e t o exer ci s e an opportuni tyt o “optout ” cons t i tut es cons entt o t he j ur i s di ct i on of the cl as s act i on courtbyan abs entm emberof a pl ai nt i ff c l as s even w hen thatm ember lac k s m in im u m c o n tac t w ith th e c las s a c tio n f o ru m . T h e n , in G r i m es v. V i t al i nk C om m uni cat i ons C orp. , 17 F. 3d 1553 ( 3d C ir . 1 9 9 4 ), w e f

u rth er h eld th at, w h ere the c lass ac ti o n co u rt has j ur i s di ct i on overan abs entm emberof a pl ai nt i ff c l as s and i tl i t i gat es and det erm i nes the ade quacyof the r epr es ent at i on of thatm ember , the mem beri s for ecl os ed fr om l at er r el i t i gat i ng thati s s ue. T hus , i tfol l ow s thatchal l enges t o the t erm s of a s ett l ementagr eement , i t s el f, ar e notappr opr i at e for
c o llate ra l re v iew . S e e In re O rth o p e d ic B o n e S c re w P ro d u c ts14 L i ab. L i t i g. , 350 F. 3d 360, 364- 65 ( 3d C i r . 2003) ( hol di ng that a “c hal l enge t o t he pr opr i etyof the s ett l ementagr eementand i t s t erm s ” i s for ecl os ed bythe appr oval of the s ett l ement
a g re e m e n t in a f

in a l, u n a p p e a la b le o rd e r.) I V . C ur r e nt C hal l e nge s t o t he Se t t l e m e nt A gr e e m e nt T he appe al s befor e thi s C our tar e fr om thr ee Pr etr i al O r der s of the D i s tr i ctC our t , al l addr es s i ng var i at i ons on the
s ame si tuat i on. Pr etr i al O r der2929 ( appea l s docket ed at03- 3401 and 03- 3402) w as the deni al of a mot i on m ade a ft er s ett l ementbyA ppel l ant s , al l of w hom w er e dow ns tr eam opt out s , ar gui ng thatthei rdue pr oces s r i ght s w er e vi ol at ed by i nadequa t e r epr es ent at i on ats ett l ement . Pr etr i al O r der3085 ( appea l docket ed at03- 4465) w as the deni al of a mot i on m ade
a f te r s e ttle m e n t b yA p p e lla n ts , a ll o f w h o m h a d P H , a condi t i on notcover ed bythe s ett l ement , ar gui ng thatthei rdue pr oces s r i ght s w er e vi ol at ed byi nadequa t e r epr es ent at i on atP T O 3 0 8 5 a l s o i n c l u d e d c l a s s me mb e r s wh o h a v e P P H, 3 rai sin g a c h a llen g e b a se d o n in a d e q u a te r e p re se n tatio n, bu ttho se P P H -d ia g n o s e d c la s s m e m b e rs a re n o t p a rt o f th is a p p e a l. 15 s ett l ement . Pr etr i al O r der3849 ( appea l docket ed at04- 3661)

3
w as the gr antof a mot i on byW y eth t o enj oi n A ppel l ant s , w ho
w er e notdi agnos ed bythe s ett l ementdeadl i ne, fr om br i ngi ng s ui ti n N ew Y or k t o chal l enge the ade quacyof thei rnot i ce a n d re p re s e n ta tio n a t s e ttle m e n t. A ppl y i ng due pr oces s pr ot ect i ons t o the fa ct s of ea ch
s etof A ppel l ant s , w e fi nd thattheyhave a l r eadyr ece i ved
a d e q u a te p ro c e d u ra l p ro tec tio n s. N o c o llate ra l re v iew is avai l abl e w hen cl as s m ember s have ha d a ful l and fa i rhear i ng and have gener al l yhad thei rpr ocedur al r i ght s pr ot ect ed dur i ng the appr oval of the Sett l ementA gr eement . C ol l at er al
r evi ew i s onl yavai l abl e w hen cl as s m ember s ar e r ai s i ng an i s s ue thatw as notpr oper l ycons i der ed bythe D i s tr i ctC our tat16 an ea rl ier st ag e in th e li ti g ati o n . H ere , the D istri ct C o u rt car eful l yexami ned the ade quacyof r epr es ent at i on and pr ocedur al pr ot ect i ons atthe fa i rnes s hear i ng, and that exami nat i on dul ycover ed the var i at i ons pr es ent ed bythe
a p p e a ls b e f

o re u s. T h u s, th e D istric t C o u rt w a s c o rre c t in
r ej ect i ng al l thr ee c hal l enges . T o i l l um i nat e thi s concl us i on, w e w ill a d d re s s th e th re e a p p e a ls b e f o re u s in d iv id u a lly. A . D o w n stre a m O p t O u ts A s t o t he fi r s tgr oup of A ppel l ant s , the dow ns tr eam opt out s , i ti s cl earthatthe i s s ue of a dequac yof r epr es ent at i on w as expli ci t l yadd res sed bythe D i stri ctC ou rtatthe fa i rness h e a ri n g . S e e P T O 1 4 1 5 M e m o ra n d u m a t 9 9 -1 2 2 . T he D i stri ctC ou rtspeci fi cal l ycon si dered A pp el l ants ’ arg u m en ts r eg ard ing intr ac lass co n fli cts. T h e D istri ct C o u rt g a v e c o n sid e ra b le tre a tm e n t to th e a rg u m e n t th a t th is S e ttl e m e n t A g re e m e n t h a d p ro b lem s a n a lo g o u s to th o se in17 A m c h e m P ro d u c ts , In c . v . W in d s o r, 5 2 1 U .S . 5 9 1 (1 9 9 7 ). T he D i stri ctC ou rtspeci fi cal l yfou nd that there i s no “f utur es” p ro b lem w ith th is S e ttl e m e n t A g re e m e n t b e c a u se , u n lik e in A m chem, w her e as bes t os cl as s m ember s coul d notknow of their ex p o su re o r disea se, po tential class m em b ers a re a w are of thei rexpos ur e t o di etdrugs and anyi nj ur i es fr om that expos ur e ar e det ect abl e i n m edi cal t es t s – the i nj ur i es w i l l not rem ain laten t fo r 30 o r 40 y ea rs. T h e D istri ct C o u rt sp e c if ica llyf o u n d th a t th e m e d ica l ev id e n c e o v e rw h e lm in g ly sh o w s tha t th e h ea rtco n d it ion s ca u sed b ythes e d ietd rug s are d etec table sh o rt lyaf

ter use o f th e d rug s ce ase s an d that there is no ev iden ce that the c o n d it ion s ca u sed b ythes e d rug s are l at ent . See PT O 1415 M emora ndum at105 ( di s cus s i ng n u m e ro u s m e d ic a l s tu d ie s ). Fur ther , the D i s tr i ctC our tal s o r ej ect ed the ar gum ent thatthi s Set t l ementA gr eementl acks the s tructur al pr ot ect i ons18 thatdoom ed the s ett l ementagr eementi n A m chem. T he D i s tr i ctC our ts peci fi cal l yfound thatthi s Set t l ement A greem ent i ncludes structural prot ect i on s t o p rot ectcl ass m ember s w i th vary i ng di agnos es , poi nt i ng t o the abi l i tyof a part i cul arcl as s m embert o “s t ep up” t o hi ghercompensa t i on l evel s as thei rdi s eas e pr ogr es s es . PT O 1415 M emora ndum at 113- 4. T he D i s tr i ctC our tal s o cons i der ed the ar gum entthat
c las s m e m b e rs w h o w o u ld e x e rc ise d o w n stre a m o p t o u t rig h ts
w er e s ubj ectt o an i m pr opertr ade- off dur i ng s ett l ement negot i at i ons . A ft ercons i der i ng the r el evantcas e l aw , the D i s tr i ctC our tconcl uded:

In sum , the co urtfi nd s that C l ass C ouns el ’ s agr eementt o w ai ve puni t i ve damage cl ai m s on i nt erm edi at e and ba ck end opt out s i n excha nge forpr ot ect i on agai ns ts t atut e of l i m i t at i ons and c laim sp littin g d e f

e n se s re p re se n ts19 a f a ir a n d w h o llya p p ro p ria te tr ade- off. T hes e pr ovi s i ons do not r epr es entan i m pr operal l ocat i on, nordo theyaff

ectthe pr ocedur al f a irn e ss o f

th e se ttl e m e n t. P T O 1 4 1 5 M e m o ra n d u m a t 1 1 5 . T h e se A p p e llan ts a rg u e th a t b e c a u se th e sp e c if ic i ndi vi dual s w ho ar e A ppel l ant s i n thi s cas e w er e notthe speci fi c i nd i vidual s w ho rai sed obj ect i on s atthe fa i rness hear i ng, theym us thave the opportuni tyt o l i t i gat e the i s s ue themsel ves . T hi s ar gum enti gnor es the underpi nni ngs of the cl as s act i on m echa ni s m . I f thi s ar gum entw er e t o be ac cept ed,
eac h cl as s m emberw oul d be abl e t o r el i t i gat e ea ch i s s ue, re n d e rin g th e c las s a c tio n m e c h a n ism p o in tles s. W h ile it is tru e th a t th e sp e c if

ic A p p e llan ts in th is c a se d id n o t, themsel ves , l i t i gat e thi s i s s ue atthe fa i rnes s hear i ng, other
c las s m e m b e rs w h o a re re p re se n tativ e o f th e m d id lit ig a te th is iss u e a n d th e D istric t C o u rt c o n sid e re d a ll o f th e a rg u m e n ts20 and evi dence i n t hatr egar d. A ppel l ant s w er e r epr es ent ed by othercl as s m ember s atthe fa i rnes s hear i ng and bec aus e the D istric t C o u rt d e c id e d th a t th e c las s w a s a d e q u a tely
r epr es ent ed, the i s s ue of a dequat e r epr es ent at i on of A p p e lla n ts h a s a lr e a d yb e e n f a ir ly litig a te d . A ppel l ant s al s o ar gue thatthi s C our thas noty et addr es s ed the ade quacyof r epr es ent at i on beca us e the appe al f ro m th e a p p ro v a l o f

th e c las s s e ttl e m e n t w a s v o lu n tar ily
w i thdr aw n due t o s ett l ementbetw een W y eth and the i ndi vi dual cl as s m ember s fi l i ng thatappea l . T her e i s no s uppor tforthe pr opos i t i on thatbeca us e a pa r tydoes not pur s ue an a ppeal of a D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s or der , thator derdoes
n o t b in d th e c las s m e m b e rs o r c a n n o t b e c o n sid e re d f o r its pr ecl us i ve ef

fec t . See O r thopedi c B one Scr ew , 350 F. 3d at 3 6 1 (n o tin g th a t “a p p e a l o f c las s s e ttl e m e n t w a s v o lu n tar ily di s m i s s ed, r ender i ng the D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s or derfi nal and21 u n ap p ea lable.”) I ti s al s o w or th not i ng thatthi s C our thas , i n other appea l s fr om thi s cl as s s ett l ement , addr es s ed the ade quacyof
r epr es ent at i on. See I n r e D i etD rugs , 282 F. 3d 220, 231 ( 3d C ir. 2 0 0 2 ) (“ T h a t v a rio u s s u b c las se s in th e B ro w n c las s c o u ld fi nd themsel ves i n compet i t i on does notbyi t s el f es t abl i s h an
ac tual co n fli ct un d erm ining ad eq u ac yo f re p rese n tat ion ”), I n r e D i etD rugs , 93 Fed. A ppx. 338, 344 ( 3d C i r . 2004) (o b se rv in g “ [ t]h a t ce rta in c las s m e m b e rs w e re d if f e re n tly situ a ted w ith re sp e c t to f ili n g d e a d lin e s s h o u ld n o t b e tak e n to
m ean thatthei rover al l i nt er es t s di ver ged fr om thatof the gener al cl as s ” and c oncl udi ng thatr epr es ent at i on w as ad eq u ate). T hi s fi r s tgr oup of A ppel l ant s , the dow ns tr eam opt o u t s , we r e a d e q u a t e l yr e p r e s e n t e d a ts e t t l e me n ta n d th a ts a me iss u e h a s a lre a d yb e e n ra ise d a n d lit ig a ted . T h e se A p p e llan ts22 have be en af

for ded the due pr oces s pr ot ect i ons nece s s aryfor the S et t l em ent A greem ent t o b i nd them . T herefore, these A p p e llan ts c a n n o t n o w c h a llen g e th e a d e q u a c yo f th e ir
r epr es ent at i on y etagai n bybr i ngi ng thi s col l at er al att ack. B . E l evat ed P ul m onary H y pert ens i on T he seco nd group of A pp el l ants , tho se w i th P H , al so c a n n o t b rin g a c o llate ra l atta c k o n th e c las s s e ttl e m e n t at th is
s t age i n t he l i t i gat i on. T hi s i s forthe s ame fundam ent al
rea so n as th e d o w n str ea m o p t ou ts – the issue s raised h ere w er e r ai s ed bycl as s m ember s atthe fa i rnes s hear i ng and rejected b ythe D istri ct C o u rt . T h e D istri ct C o u rth ea rd
e x ten siv e tes tim o n yc o n c e rn in g v a rio u s c o n d iti o n s a n d th e ir
c on ne c t i on t o d i e tdrug us e a nd a pp r ov e d the e xc l us i on of PH fr om the Sett l ementA gr eement . PT O 1415 M emora ndum at 29 -41. In fact , the D i stri ctC ou rtspeci fi cal l ytreat ed P H as a sy m p to m o f

m a n yh e a rt c o n d iti o n s, ra th e r th a n a se p a ra te23 i nj urycaus ed bydi etdrugs i n i t s det ai l ed di s cus s i on of the
m edi cal evi dence . PT O 1415 M emora ndum at28- 9, 32, 37, 39. Fur ther , the D i s tr i ctC our tappr oved the Sett l ement A gr eement ’ s defi ni t i on of PPH , a s er i ous l ung di s eas e that thes e A ppel l ant s ar gue i s bas ed on a f l aw ed def

i ni t i on that
w ro n g ly ex c lu d e s th e m . P T O 1 4 1 5 M e m o ra n d u m a t 3 7 -4 1 . A s di s cus s ed above , the D i s tr i ctC our thear d and
r ej ect ed ar gum ent s thatr epr es ent at i on w as notadequa t e for thos e w i th di ffe r i ng condi t i ons . PT O 1415 M emora ndum at 11 3-5. T he D i stri ctC ou rtspeci fi cal l yfou nd that cl ass m em bers had “m eaningfu l op tou tri gh t s, ” un l i ke the cl ass m em b ers in A m ch em . P T O 1 4 1 5 M em o ran d u m at 11 4 . In add i t i on , bey on d the D i stri ctC ou rt ’s con si derat i on of these i s s ues atthe fa i r nes s hear i ng, the D i s tr i ctC our thas al r eady heard an d rej ect ed co l l at eral chall eng es byvari ou s cl ass m ember s bas ed on thes e s ame ar gum ent s . See PT O 238324 (appoint i ng speci al m ast er t o ad m i nis t er s creeni ng of class
me mbe r s who me e tr e q u i r e me n t s f o rPP H de l i n e a t e d i n PTO 1415) , PT O 2623 ( concl udi ng thatm ovi ng cl as s m ember s do notm eetdefi ni t i on of PPH , deny i ng ar gum entthatdefi ni t i on of P P H shou l d b e exp and ed, and fi nd i ng that cl ass m em bers’ due pr oces s r i ght s w er e notvi ol at ed bythe Sett l ement A g ree m en t) . T hus , the D i s tr i ctC our tnotonl yaddr es s ed the i s s ues r ai s ed her e bythe PH A ppel l ant s atthe fa i rnes s hear i ng, but h a s a lso su b se q u e n tlya d d re ss e d th e a d e q u a c yo f th e ir
re p re se n tatio n a n d d u e p ro c e ss p ro tec tio n s. A s s u c h , this gr oup of A ppel l ant s has r ece i ved the due pr oces s pr ot ect i ons nece s s aryforthem t o be bound bythe cl as s s ett l ementand cannotr el i t i gat e thos e i s s ues her e. C . P os t - Scree ni ng D eadl i ne D i agnose s T he thi r d gr oup of A ppel l ant s , w ho w er e di agnos edA s a thr es hol d m att er , the j ur i s di ct i on of the D i s tr i ct 4 C our t overthe thi r d gr oup of A ppel l ant s i s di s put ed. T he A ppel l ant s ar gue thatthe D i s tr i ctC our thad no i ndepende nt b a sis o f ju risd ictio n o v e r th e m b e c a u se th e yb ro u g h t th e ir su it c h a llen g in g th e S e ttl e m e n t A g re e m e n t in N e w Y o rk . T h is arg u m en t i s w ith o u t m erit . A p p ell an ts bro u g h t suitin N ew Y o rk s tat e courtand W y eth r emoved t he ca s e t o fede r al court . T he M D L panel then t r ans ferr ed t he cas e t o the D i s tr i ct C our t . T he cas e l aw , gener al l y , s uppor t s the pos i t i on thatthe M D L tr ans fer g a v e th e D istric t C o u rt ju risd ictio n . S e e , e .g ., I n re A u to R ef ini s hi ng Pai ntA nt i trus tL i t i g. , 358 F. 3d 288, 197 n. 11 ( 3d C i r . 2004) . PT O 1415 gi ves the D i s tr i ct C our t cont i nui ng j ur i s di ct i on over “thi s act i on and each of the P art i es , i ncl udi ng [W y et h ] and the cl as s m ember s , t o admi ni s t er , s upervi s e, in te r p r e t a n d e n f

o rc e th e se ttl e m e n t in a c c o rd a n c e w ith its t erm s . ” PT O 1415 at8. I n addi ti o n , thi s C our thas al r eady rej ect ed a si m i l ar ar gu m ent byotherdietdrugs cl ass m em bers. S ee In re D iet D rug s, 2 8 2 F . 3 d 2 2 0 , 2 3 0 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 2 ), (d e n y in g p e titio n f

o r w ri t o f

m a n d a m u s ). 25 aft erthe s cr eeni ng deadl i ne expi r ed, fac e a s i m i l arpr obl em as the fi r s ttw o s et s of A ppel l ant s . A gai n, fai rnes s of not i ce a nd adequa cyof r epr es ent at i on have a l r eadybeen l i t i gat ed. 4 T he D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s appr oval of the Sett l ement A gr eementconcl uded thatthe not i ce pr ovi ded w as m or e than26 adeq uate. In fact , i tapp ears from the record t hat these A pp el l ants recei ved actual not i ce. In addit i on , these A pp el l ants are es sent i al l yrel y i ng on the sam e “fu tures”
ar gum entthatw as thor oughl ycons i der ed and r ej ect ed bythe D i s tr i ctC our t , as di s cus s ed above . PT O 1415 M emora ndum at 11 3 -5. A lso, as d iscu ssed ab o v e, th e D istri ct C o u rt co n side red an d rejected the s u g g esti o n that there w ere di s abl i ng i ntr acl as s confl i ct s thatcompromi s ed the ade quacy of r epr es ent at i on. PT O 1415 M emora ndum at113- 4. F in a lly , the se A p p e llan ts a re a ttem p tin g to f a c tu a lly chal l enge the D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s concl us i on thatV H D i s not late n t. T h is c h a llen g e is c lea rlyin a p p ro p ria te a s it is n o t a componentof a due pr oces s chal l enge, appr opr i at e for col l at er al att ack. See O r thopedi c B one Scr ew , 350 F. 3d at 36 4-65 (ho l ding t hat a col l at eral chall eng e t o clas s s ett l ement ’ s t erm s i s for ecl os ed) . T hi s cl ai m coul d be27 pr oper l yr ai s ed i n a R ul e 60( b) m ot i on w i th new evi dence
s uppor t i ng the cl ai m , i f s uch evi dence exi s t s . A ppel l ant s do not e thattheyhave f

i l ed a Rul e 60( b) m ot i on w i th the D i s tr i ct C our t , butthatthe mot i on has been s t ay ed pendi ng the out come of ot herl i t i gat i on. R egar dl es s of thatfac t , the D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s fi ndi ng r egar di ng the non- l at entnatur e of V H D sh o u ld n o t b e c o n sid e re d in th is a p p e a l. V . C oncl usi on A ll th re e se ts o f

A p p e llan ts h a v e h a d a f u ll an d f a ir oppor tuni tyt o be hea r d and have al r eadyr ai s ed and l i t i gat ed the cha l l enges theyar gue her e. I tcan be s ai d “thatthe pr ocedur e adopt ed, fai r l yi ns ur es the pr ot ect i on of the i nt er es t s ” of thes e part i es , w ho ar e pr oper l ybound bythe S e ttl e m e n t A g re e m e n t. H a n sb e rry , 3 1 1 U .S . at 4 2 . T h u s, a ll thr ee gr oups of A ppel l ant s cannotcol l at er al l ychal l enge the cl as s s ett l ementher e and the D i s tr i ctC our tw i l l be af fi r m ed.