Smith v. General Motors, LLC et al
Plaintiff: Smith, Jennifer Lankford, ALL PLAINTIFFS, Berenice Summerville and Ryan Charles Smith
Defendant: General Motors, LLC, General Motors L.L.C. and General Motors Holding, L.L.C.
Respondent: King & Spalding LLP
Alternative Dispute Resolution (Adr) Provider: Brenda Gregory
Case Number: 1:2015cv00764
Filed: February 2, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: XX Out of State
Presiding Judge: Jesse M Furman
Nature of Suit: Motor Vehicle Prod. Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332mv
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on August 10, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 10, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 233 ORDER NO. 173 [Regarding Motions to Dismiss for Failure to Comply with Discovery Obligations]. To avoid confusion, effective immediately, all timelines established for earlier Waves shall also apply to Wave Four and Wave Pool Plaintiffs, just as they applied to Plaintiffs in the prior Waves. In particular: New GM may not file a motion to dismiss for failure to comply with obligations under Order Nos. 25 and 108 unless and until the plaintiff fails to cure any defects within fourteen days of the filing of a notice of overdue discovery. Any plaintiff subject to a motion to dismiss without prejudice for failure to comply with such discovery obligations shall have fourteen days to oppose the motion or certify compliance, and New GM shall have seven days to reply. Any plaintiff who is dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with such discovery obligations shall have thirty days from the date of dismissal to move to vacate the dismissal, provided he or she submits all required documentation or otherwise contests the dismissal. New GM may not file a motion to dismiss with prejudice for failure to comply with such discovery obligations unless and until the plaintiff fails to move to vacate the dismissal within thirty days. Any Plaintiff subject to a motion to dismiss with prejudice for failure to comply with such discovery obligations shall have fourteen days to oppose the motion or certify compliance, and New GM shall have seven days to reply. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/10/20) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (yv)
June 26, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 232 ORDER NO. 172: [Regarding Sealed and Redacted Filings]: The Court previously granted parties in this action permission to temporarily file documents under seal or in redacted form without first obtaining specific court approval and required that they contemporaneously file a notice that a document was filed under seal. ECF No. 4567 ("Order No. 133"). At the time that the Court issued Order No. 133, the Electronic Case Filing System in the Southern District of New York did not allow parties to restrict viewing access to a document filed on the docket, and it was therefore impossible for parties to file sealed or unredacted documents electronically. The Courts then-operative Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases therefore required parties to email unsealed and unredacted (clean and highlighted) versions of their filings to the Court. The Districts Electronic Case Filing System was recently changed to allow parties to restrict viewing access to documents filed on the docket, and the Court revised its Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases to reflect those changes. Going forward, parties should file any proposed sealed or redacted documents in accordance with Rules 7.C.ii-iv of the Court's Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases, which are available at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-jesse-m-furman. For the reasons stated in Order No. 133, however, the parties may temporarily file documents under seal or in redacted form, and they therefore do not need to file a letter-motion seeking the Court's specific permission. Parties should link all sealed filings to this Order or to Order No. 133, in accordance with Rule 6.12 of the Electronic Case Filing Rules & Instructions, available at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/rules/ecf-related-instructions. In light of the fact that a docket entry for any sealed or redacted filings will appear on the docket, the parties also need not file a notice that a document was filed under seal. Except to the extent modified here, Order No. 133 remains in effect. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/26/2020) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (jca)
May 27, 2020 ***DELETED DOCUMENT. Deleted document number (7962) ORDER NO. 169. The document was incorrectly filed in this case. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ks)
May 27, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 231 ORDER NO. 169: in case 1:14-cv-02458-JMF; terminating (7956) Motion for Discovery in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. [Regarding Future Access to MDL Documents Production] For good cause shown, the Court adopts the following procedures for all remaining future personal injury/wrongful death ("PIWD") Plaintiffs to access MDL 2543 document productions, depositions and exhibits, and Common Benefit Work Product as further set forth herein. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 7956. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/26/2020) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ks)
May 27, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 230 ORDER NO. 169: in case 1:14-cv-02458-JMF; terminating (7956) Motion for Discovery in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. [Regarding Future Access to MDL Documents Production] For good cause shown, the Court adopts the following procedures for all remaining future personal injury/wrongful death ("PIWD") Plaintiffs to access MDL 2543 document productions, depositions and exhibits, and Common Benefit Work Product as further set forth herein. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 7956. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/26/2020) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ks)
May 4, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 229 ORDER. In light of the advanced stage of the proceedings and the slim likelihood that further relevant cases will be filed, the Court is inclined to suggest to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation that it decline to transfer and consolidate further tag-along cases effective June 1, 2020. No later than May 11, 2020, any party objecting to that proposal shall file a letter explaining the nature of the objection on ECF. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/4/20) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (yv)
May 4, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 228 ORDER SUPPLEMENTING ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS SETTLEMENT, DIRECTING NOTICE UNDER RULE 23(E), AND GRANTING RELATED RELIEF in case 1:14-cv-02458-JMF; granting (7888) Motion for Settlement in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: The Court hereby preliminarily approves the revised provisions of the Amended Settlement Agreement, including the amended Class Notice exhibits (Exhibits 5, 11, 12, 16 and 17), for substantially the same reasons as stated in the Preliminary Approval Order. At the time that the Court entered the Preliminary Approval Order, the Court had already been informed of the terms of the agreement-in-principle with the AAT and finds that the incorporation of those terms in the Amended Settlement Agreement does not alter any of its previous findings. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 7888. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/4/20) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (yv)
April 27, 2020 ***DELETED ENTRY. Deleted entry Class Action Certified. The entry was incorrectly filed in this case. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(yv)
April 27, 2020 Set/Reset Deadlines: ( Motions due by 9/28/2020.), Set/Reset Hearings:( Fairness Hearing set for 12/18/2020 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(yv)
April 27, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 227 ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS SETTLEMENT, DIRECTING NOTICE UNDER RULE 23(E), AND GRANTING RELATED RELIEF in case 1:14-cv-02458-JMF; granting (7816) Motion for Settlement in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: The Court preliminarily approves the proposed Settlement Agreement, including the Allocation Decision, because the Parties have shown, and the Court concludes, that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(1)(B)(i), the Court will likely be able to grant final approval and find that the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate, including that (i) Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs' Class Counsel have adequately represented the Class, (ii) the Subclass representatives and Allocation Counsel have adequately represented their respective Subclasses, (iii) the Settlement Agreement was entered into in good faith, free of collusion, through significant arm's-length negotiations assisted by the experienced Court-Appointed Economic Loss Settlement Mediator; (iv) the Allocation Decision was reached through arms-length negotiations and presentations from Allocation Counsel and then determined by the Court-Appointed Economic Loss Settlement Mediator; (v) the relief provided for the Class and each Subclass is adequate taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal and the effectiveness of distributing relief; and (vi) the Settlement Agreement and Allocation Decision treat Class Members equitably relative to each other. The Court authorizes establishment of the Common Fund in accordance with the terms of the Qualified Settlement Fund Trust Agreement, which is attached to the Settlement Agreement as Exhibit 7. The Common Fund is established as a "qualified settlement fund" within the meaning of Section 468B of the Internal Revenue Code and the Treasury Regulations thereunder. The Common Fund shall be operated in a manner consistent with the rules of Treasury Regulation Section 1.468B-1, et seq. The Court shall retain continuing jurisdiction and supervision over the Common Fund, in accordance with the terms of the Qualified Settlement Fund Trust Agreement. The Court appoints Flora Bian of JND Legal Administration as Qualified Settlement Fund Administrator and Trustee to carry out all duties and responsibilities of the Qualified Settlement Fund Administrator and Trustee as specified in the Settlement Agreement, the Qualified Settlement Fund Trust Agreement and herein. The Parties and the Motors Liquidation Company Avoidance Action Trust (the "AAT") shall file an amended Settlement Agreement (the Amended Settlement Agreement), no later than May 1, 2020, which, in consideration for the AAT's agreement to contribute $2.2 million to the Common Fund, shall include a provision releasing all potential claims against Old GM, the Old GM bankruptcy estate and the AAT, and otherwise be consistent with (i) the terms set forth in that Joint Letter, dated April 22, 2020, filed at Docket Number 7869 and (ii) the representations made on the record at the Joint Hearing held on April 23, 2020 before the Honorable Jesse M. Furman and the Honorable Martin Glenn. For the avoidance of doubt, and consistent with the Order (I) Approving the GUC Trust Administrator's Actions; (II) Approving the Settlement Agreement and the Release Agreement Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9019 and (III) Authorizing Reallocation of GUC Trust Assets entered in the Bankruptcy Court (Dkt. 14730), any provisions in the Settlement Agreement preserving claims against Old GM, the Old GM bankruptcy estate and the AAT, including but not limited to paragraphs 142 and 143, are not preliminarily approved. The Court, for settlement purposes only, appoints the following Plaintiffs as interim class representatives for the Class as further set forth in this Order. The Court, for settlement purposes only, appoints the following Plaintiffs as interim representatives of each Subclass as further set forth in this Order. The Court appoints, for settlement purposes only, Steve W. Berman, of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP and Elizabeth J. Cabraser of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP as interim Class Counsel under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(g)(3). Class Counsel are authorized to act on behalf of the Class with respect to all acts required by, or which may be given pursuant to, the Settlement Agreement or such other acts that are reasonably necessary to consummate the proposed Settlement set forth in the Settlement Agreement and as further set forth in this Order. The Court therefore approves the proposed Class Notice plan, and hereby directs that such notice be disseminated to Class Members in the manner set forth in the Settlement Agreement and described in the Declaration of the Class Action Settlement Administrator attached as Exhibit 14 to the Settlement Agreement under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(1). The Plaintiffs, New GM, and the GUC Trust are directed to take all necessary and appropriate steps to disseminate Class Notice, including Notice substantially in the forms of amended Exhibits 5 (Long Form Notice), 11 (Short Form Notice), and 12 (Summary Settlement Notice) to the Settlement Agreement. The Parties are further directed to ensure the MDL website provides a link to the Settlement website. The Court appoints Jennifer Keough of JND Legal Administration ("JND") as Class Action Settlement Administrator and directs Ms. Keough to carry out all duties and responsibilities of the Class Action Settlement Administrator as specified in the Settlement Agreement and herein. The Court authorizes the Class Action Settlement Administrator, through data aggregators or otherwise, to request, obtain and utilize vehicle registration information from the Department of Motor Vehicles for all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands and all other United States territories and/or possessions for the purposes of identifying the identity of and contact information for purchasers and lessees of Subject Vehicles. Vehicle registration information includes, but is not limited to, owner/lessee name and address information, registration date, year, make, and model of the vehicle. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, all Settlement Implementation Expenses, including but not limited to the costs of Class Notice and retention of the Class Action Settlement Administrator and the Qualified Settlement Fund Administrator and Trustee, shall be paid from the Common Fund, but only upon either (i) written approval by Plaintiffs Class Counsel, New GM, and the GUC Trust or (ii) leave of Court. The Court will hold a Fairness Hearing on December 18, 2020, at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom 1105 of Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, located at 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007. The purpose of the Fairness Hearing will be to: (i) determine whether the proposed Settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate to the Class, and should be approved by the Court; (ii) determine whether judgment should be entered pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, dismissing the Actions with prejudice and granting the Class Members Release; (iii) determine whether the Class should be finally certified for purposes of settlement; (iv) consider any properly filed Settlement Objections; and (v) consider any other matters necessary in connection with the final approval of the Settlement Agreement. No later than November 9, 2020, i.e., the first business day more than 195 days after entry of this Order, the Parties and/or any Class Member supporting the Settlement may submit briefing and any related materials in response to any Settlement Objections and/or in support of the Settlement. Any opposition to final approval of the Settlement shall be filed by November 23, 2020; any reply shall be filed by December 3, 2020. Any submissions by the Parties shall be filed unless leave is obtained from the Court to file separately. No later than September 28, 2020, i.e., 154 days after entry of this Order, Class Counsel shall file a motion for Attorneys' Fees and Expenses in accordance with the terms of Section VIII of the Settlement Agreement. Any opposition shall be filed within two weeks of the motion; any reply shall be filed within one week of the opposition. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over the Settlement Agreement and the Actions pending before this Court to consider all further matters arising out of or connected with the Settlement. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 7816. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/27/20) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (yv)
April 22, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 226 ORDER: During the hearing scheduled for tomorrow, the Honorable Martin Glenn, United States Bankruptcy Judge for the Southern District of New York, will hear argument first concerning the GUC Trust's motion. The undersigned will then hear argument concerning (1) the motion to withdraw the reference and (2) the motion for preliminary approval of the settlement. In accordance with the Court's Emergency Individual Rules and Practices in Light of COVID-19, available at https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-jesse-m-furman, counsel should adhere to the following rules and guidelines during the hearing.... With respect to the motion to withdraw the reference and the motion for preliminary approval of the settlement, counsel should be prepared to answer the following questions and/or address the following issues. To help ensure that the discussion proceeds smoothly, counsel should coordinate in advance to designate the presumptive speaker or speakers for each issue. (SEE ORDER.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/22/2020) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ab)
April 20, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 225 ORDER. Per the Court's Emergency Individual Rules and Practices, the hearing scheduled in this case for April 23, 2020, at 9:30 a.m. will be conducted telephonically. The Court has arranged for the use of CourtCall, an independent conference call company, to enable the parties, counsel, and anyone interested (including members of the public and press) to attend remotely. Counsel for the parties must call CourtCall's reservation desk at (888) 882-6878, or make a reservation online at www.courtcall.com, no later than 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time on April 22, 2020. CourtCall will charge parties and counsel participating in the conference $35 for the first 45 minutes, and $7.50 for each 15-minute increment thereafter. The Court has received the parties' list of attorneys who will attend and speak at the conference. If there are any changes to these lists, the parties shall notify the Court no later than 1:00 p.m. on April 22, 2020. Any changes after that time may be made only with express leave of Court, which should be requested by email at Furman_NYSDChambers@nysd.uscourts.gov. To ensure public access to the conference, the Court has arranged for CourtCall to provide a toll-free number for members of the public and press to listen to the conference. Members of the public and press should call (855) 855-8556, and enter access code 587-8792, followed by the pound (#) key. There will be no charge for using this line. Anyone using this line will be in "listen-only" mode and will not be able to speak during the proceedings. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/20/20) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (yv)
April 9, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 224 ORDER NO. 168 in case 1:14-cv-02458-JMF; terminating (7095) Motion for Summary Judgment; terminating (7100) Motion in Limine in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. The undersigned and the Honorable Martin Glenn will hold a joint hearing on the above-referenced motions on April 23, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. Unless the Courts order otherwise, the hearing will be held by telephone in light of the current public health situation. The Courts will issue orders in due course explaining how to participate in, or listen to, the telephone conference. Counsel shall promptly and prominently post this Order and call-in information on the MDL website (www.gmignitionmdl.com). No later than 1:00 p.m. on April 16, 2020, Lead Counsel, counsel for New GM, and counsel for the GUC Trust shall provide this Court with a list of any participants who should be granted speaking privileges for the conference. Unless the Court orders otherwise for good cause shown by letter motion in advance of the conference, all other participants in the telephone conference will be in listen-only mode. In light of the foregoing, the Court concludes that other pending motions related to the Economic Loss Plaintiffs' claims can and should be terminated without prejudice to renewal in the event that the proposed settlement is not approved or otherwise consummated. The Clerk of Court is therefore directed to terminate 14-MD-2543, ECF Nos. 6065, 7095, and 7100. If counsel for any party believes that any other motion can and should be terminated, they shall so advise the Court. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/6/2020) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ks)
April 6, 2020 Set/Reset Hearings: Telephone Conference set for 4/23/2020 at 09:30 AM before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ks)
March 4, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 223 ORDER NO. 167: Regarding Procedures and Schedule for Wave Four Targeted Discovery and Motion Practice and Additional Wave Pools to Address Remaining Personal Injury Claims -- Given the remarkable success of the "wave" process in this multidistrict litigation ("MDL") to date, the Court agrees with New GM that a Wave Four should be adopted to address the remaining personal injury and wrongful death claims (many of which were filed after the previous waves were adopted) and any new claims filed in the future. For good cause shown, the Court thus adopts the following schedule and procedures for Wave Four discovery of and motion practice regarding the remaining personal injury and wrongful death cases, as well any new claims that may be filed and consolidated going forward. That said, the Court is sympathetic to Lead Counsel's concerns regarding claims that have been pending in this MDL for a significant amount of time. See ECF No. 7783, at 3. To help ensure that such claims are advanced more quickly, with an eye toward settlement or remand, the Court would be open to adopting more "aggressive" procedures claims that were initially filed before January 1, 2017 (i.e., the first seven claims listed in ECF No. 7783-2), including but not limited to perhaps allowing "bilateral fact and expert discovery" for such claims. Id. at 5. Lead Counsel and counsel for New GM shall meet and confer to discuss the issue and, no later than March 13, 2020, submit an agreed-upon proposed order with respect to these claims or competing orders and letter briefs. Unless and until the Court adopts additional or different procedures for such claims, they shall be subject to the schedule and procedures set forth herein. (SEE ORDER.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/4/2020) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ab)
February 19, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 222 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court has considered L&E's remaining arguments and finds them to be without merit. Accordingly, L&E's motion is DENIED, without prejudice to renewal after resolution of the Pending Motion. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/19/2020) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (jca)
February 7, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 221 SCHEDULING ORDER: On February 6, 2020, Langdon & Emison filed a notice of appeal from the Court's Order of November 8, 2019. See ECF No. 7712. If any party believes the notice of appeal moots or otherwise has bearing on the pending motion for certification pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), see ECF No. 7683, it shall advise the Court by letter no later than February 10, 2020. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/7/20) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (yv)
January 21, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 220 SCHEDULING ORDER: Any party that objects to the motion for certification and entry of a final judgment filed by Langdon & Emison LLC, 14-MD-2543, ECF No. 7683, shall file a letter advising the Court of the intent to file an opposition no later than January 24, 2020. The formal opposition itself shall be filed no later than February 4, 2020. Any reply shall be filed no later than February 11, 2020. If no party files a letter by January 24, 2020, the Court will treat the motion as unopposed. Langdon & Emison incorrectly filed its motion in every single member case. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate all motions filed in member cases on January 20, 2020, but to leave to leave the motion filed on the main docket (14-MD-2543, ECF No. 7683) active. SO ORDERED. Responses due by 2/4/2020 Replies due by 2/11/2020. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 1/21/2020) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ama)
January 20, 2020 Filing 219 MOTION for Judgment Motion for Certification Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) and Entry of Final Judgment Under FRCP 58. Document filed by ALL PLAINTIFFS. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit Affidavit of Counsel)Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Emison, Brett)
December 30, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 218 ORDER NO. 166: [Regarding the December 18, 2019 Status Conference] The Court, having held a status conference on December 18, 2019, and having given counsel an opportunity to be heard on the agenda items set forth in the parties' tentative agenda letter (ECF No. 7619), as well as the Court's December 16, 2019 Order (ECF No. 7626), issues this Order to memorialize the actions taken and rulings made at the status conference. A status conference will be held Friday, January 31, 2020, at 9:30 a.m. EST in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. Consistent with the Court's comments at the status conference, by Wednesday, January 8, 2020, New GM and counsel for plaintiff Sunita Bhandari will submit a joint letter proposing next steps for Ms. Bhandari's claims. Consistent with the procedures set forth in Order No. 72 (ECF No. 1237), New GM shall file a consolidated response to the Conner Plaintiffs' motion to vacate (ECF No. 7628) and any other timely motion that may be filed relating to the Courts November 21, 2019 order (ECF No 7474) by Monday, January 6, 2020. Plaintiffs' reply, if any, shall be filed by Monday, January 13, 2020. Consistent with the Court's comments at the status conference, by Wednesday, January 15, 2020, Lead Counsel and New GM shall submit a joint proposal or competing proposals regarding next steps for the economic loss plaintiffs. SO ORDERED. (Responses due by 1/6/2020, Replies due by 1/13/2020., Status Conference set for 1/31/2020 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/30/2019) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(jca)
December 30, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 217 ORDER NO. 165. Mindful that applicable law sometimes requires approval before the claims of certain plaintiffs (such as minors) can be settled or compromised, the following procedures shall apply going forward as further set forth in this Order. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/30/19) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(yv)
December 12, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 216 OPINION AND ORDER re: (7055 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION for Reconsideration re; (7019) Memorandum & Opinion, Economic Loss Plaintiffs' Motion for Reconsideration of the Court's August 6, 2019 Summary Judgment Opinion and Order or, in the Alternative, Motion for Cert filed by GM Ignition Switch MDL Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs fail to persuade the Court that it erred in its summary judgment ruling, and they certainly do not satisfy the strict standards that govern motions for reconsideration. Nevertheless, although the question is a close one, the Court concludes that certification of an interlocutory appeal is appropriate. The Court does not make this decision lightly. An interlocutory appeal (if the Second Circuit accepts it) would result in potentially lengthy delay, and this litigation is already in its sixth year, with no end in sight absent a settlement. But the Court is not infallible. And, in the judicial system of this Nation, it is not intended to be final. Cf. Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, 540 (1953) (Jackson, J., concurring) (observing that the Supreme Court is not final because [it is] infallible, but [is] infallible only because [it is] final). Yet, absent an interlocutory appeal, the Court might well have the only and thus final word on these important issues. Moreover, an interlocutory appeal would not necessarily mean a halt to the steady progress of this litigation. Even if the Second Circuit were to grant a petition for interlocutory appeal, the Court may well be able to move forward on other fronts. There are, after all, other disputes pending, see, e.g., ECF Nos. 7095 (New GM's renewed motion for summary judgment against Plaintiffs), 7100 (New GM's motion to exclude the opinions of another of Plaintiffs' experts), and Plaintiffs bring claims under the laws of forty-seven other states and the District of Columbia. Additionally, further settlement negotiations can and should proceed in the shadow of any interlocutory appeal. Indeed, in the Court's humble view, after five-plus years of litigation, hundreds of depositions, millions of documents exchanged in discovery, and untold trees felled and ink spilled by the parties and the Court, the parties should have enough data to agree on a settlement value for this litigation; the risks of delay and reversal are merely additional data to factor into the calculus. The parties should be prepared to address these issues - at least preliminarily - at the status conference on December 18, 2019. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 7055. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/12/19) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(yv)
December 10, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 215 ORDER, The status conference scheduled for December 18, 2019 at 9:30 a.m. EST will take place in the Court's usual courtroom Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, New York, NY 10007. Counsel and others planning to attend the conference are cautioned, however, that significant elevator maintenance is underway in the courthouse. Thus, attendees should plan to arrive well in advance of the scheduled to ensure that they are in the Courtroom on time for the conference. Per its usual procedures, the Court will use CourtCall for the conference. Anyone wishing to use CourtCall to participate in, or listen to, the conference should follow the procedures set forth in Order No. 19 (ECF No. 350). No later than 1:00 p.m. on December 17, 2019, Lead Counsel and counsel for New GM shall provide Chambers with a list of any participants who should be granted speaking privileges for the conference. Unless the Court orders otherwise for good cause shown by letter motion in advance of the conference, all other CourtCall participants will be in listen-only mode. SO ORDERED. (Status Conference set for 12/18/2019 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/10/2019) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(kv)
October 8, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 214 ORDER: The status conference currently scheduled for December 12, 2019, is hereby ADJOURNED to December 18, 2019, at 9:30 a.m. EST. Counsel shall promptly update the MDL website accordingly. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/8/2019) ( Status Conference set for 12/18/2019 at 09:30 AM before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ks)
August 21, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 213 ORDER NO. 164: Consistent with the Courts comments and discussion with the parties at the status conference, by Thursday, September 12, 2019, New GM shall provide to Lead Counsel its proposal for addressing whether and to what extent the parties' submissions in connection with themotions for summary judgment, class certification, and Daubert can remain sealed or redacted. The parties must meet and confer by no later than Thursday, October 3, 2019, and submit a joint letter on this issue setting forth their position(s) by no later than Thursday, October 10, 2019. (And as further set forth in this Order.) SO ORDERED. (Motions due by 9/5/2019., Responses due by 10/7/2019, Replies due by 10/18/2019., Status Conference set for 12/12/2019 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/21/2019) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(jca)
June 21, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 212 ORDER in case 1:14-cv-02458-JMF; granting (6884) JOINT LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time Regarding Order No. 162 Deadlines in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. Application GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 6884. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/21/2019) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (jca)
May 2, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 211 ORDER: On April 12, 2019, the Court cancelled the status conference scheduled for April 18, 2019. See Docket No. 6667. No later than one week from the date of this Order, the parties shall submit a joint letter advising the Court of whether or when there is a need for a status conference and, if so, (1) what topics the conference should cover (including but not limited to whether the conference should be limited to personal injury and wrongful death cases in light of the pending class certification and summary judgment motions as to the economic loss claims); and (2) dates upon which all relevant counsel are available. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/2/2019) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(jca)
April 29, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 210 ORDER NO. 163 [Regarding Modifications to Agreed Preservation Order Nos. 2-6]: The Court, having received and reviewed the parties' April 25, 2019 request to modify or withdraw the Agreed Preservation Orders governing New GM's obligations for maintaining and preserving recalled parts covered by certain National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ("NHTSA") Recall Campaigns (Docket No. 6708), HEREBY ORDERS, ADJUDGES, and DECREES that the following Agreed Preservation Orders shall be modified and/or withdrawn as follows: Agreed Preservation Order No. 2 (Docket No. 279) Withdrawn except as to the preservation obligations relating to parts covered by NHTSA Recall Campaigns 14V-118 and 14V-153, which remain operative; Agreed Preservation Order No. 3 (Docket No. 344) Withdrawn and dissolved in its entirety; Agreed Preservation Order No. 4 (Docket No. 403) Withdrawn and dissolved in its entirety; Agreed Preservation Order No. 5 (Docket No. 605) Withdrawn and dissolved in its entirety; and Agreed Preservation Order No. 6 (Docket No. 880) Withdrawn except as to the preservation obligations relating to parts covered by NHTSA Recall Campaigns 14V-346 and 14V-394, which remain operative. Should any party to this litigation object to the foregoing modifications and/or withdrawals, such objection(s) shall be filed on the main MDL docket within twenty-one (21) days of the entry of this Order, and shall specify the particular recall campaign preservation obligation that is the subject of the objection, as well as the basis for that objection. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/29/2019) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ne)
March 8, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 209 ORDER NO. 162 [Regarding Next Steps For 18 Post-Sale Personal Injury Claims]: By Friday, March 15, 2019, New GM will provide Lead Counsel a list of plaintiffs it has identified as those it believes should be subject to dispositive motion practice in light of the Court's December 28, 2017 Opinion and Order. See In re GM LLC Ignition Switch Litig., 2017 WL 6729295, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 28, 2017). By Friday, March 22, 2019, New GM and Lead Counsel shall submit a joint letter (and, if appropriate, a proposed order) with respect to how the Court should address the claims of those plaintiffs. By Friday, March 29, 2019, the parties are to meet and confer and provide the Court joint or competing lists of plaintiffs who may be eligible for Suggestion of Remand No. 1. By Monday, April 15, 2019, Lead Counsel and Counsel for New GM shall submit to the Court a joint letter addressing the parties' recommendations as to the proper venue for remand or transfer of each of the plaintiffs subject to Suggestion of Remand No. 1. (As further set forth in this order) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/8/2019) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ne)
March 6, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 208 MDL CONSOLIDATION ORDER: Pursuant to the June 12, 2014 Order of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML), In re: General Motors Ignition Switch Litigation, 14-MD-2543, has been assigned to this Court for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. 14-MD-2543, Docket No. 1. As this case, Beach v. General Motors LLC, 19-CV-2004, has been directly filed in this district and, based on the Court's review, appears to be within the scope of the multidistrict litigation, it is hereby ORDERED that it is transferred to 14-MD-2543 for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings, subject to the process for objections set forth in Section II of Order No. 8. See 14-MD-2543, Docket No. 249, at 4-5. Counsel is advised to consult the docket in 14-MD-2543, including Order Nos. 1 and 25 (14-MD-2543, Docket Nos. 19 and 422, respectively), as well as the GM Ignition Switch MDL website (http://gmignitionmdl.com), for other pertinent information.The Clerk of Court is directed to docket this Order in the above-captioned cases. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/06/2019) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ama)
February 26, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 207 ORDER NO. 160 [Regarding Next Steps for Remaining Post-Sale Personal Injury Claims]: By Friday, May 31, 2019, each Wave Three plaintiff shall refile his or her complaint or an amended complaint in this Court and pay any filing fee associated with filing a complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1914(a), or be dismissed without prejudice. Targeted, case-specific fact discovery of Wave Three plaintiffs shall commence on Wednesday, May 1, 2019, and shall conclude by Friday, September 20, 2019. Wave Three plaintiffs shall present their expert witnesses for deposition on or before Monday, December 2, 2019. By Wednesday, July 10, 2019, New GM will file its motion to dismiss Wave Three claims that New GM believes should be dismissed for failure to state a claim. Plaintiffs desiring to amend their complaints will file amended complaints on their respective individual dockets by Monday September 23, 2019. By June 15, 2019, Plaintiffs shall depose New GM's experts. By Friday, April 19, 2019, New GM shall file any motions to exclude Plaintiffs' expert under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert and for summary judgment on the issue "of whether an unintended ignition switch and/or key rotation could have and did occur prior to air bag deployment." The motions shall be supported by a single, consolidated memorandum of law not to exceed thirty-five pages. By Friday, May 17, 2019, Plaintiffs shall file any opposition, supported by a single, consolidated memorandum of law not to exceed thirty-five pages; By Friday, June 7, 2019, New GM shall file any reply, in the form of a single, consolidated memorandum of law not to exceed fifteen pages. (Amended Pleadings due by 9/23/2019. Deposition due by 12/2/2019. Fact Discovery due by 9/20/2019. Motions due by 7/10/2019. Responses due by 5/17/2019. Replies due by 6/7/2019.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/26/2019) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ne)
February 19, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 206 AGREED AMENDED ORDER REGARDING THE PRESERVATION OF IGNITION SWITCH PARTS GOVERNED BY NHTSA RECALL CAMPAIGN 14v-047000: New GM shall undertake reasonable efforts to assist any named plaintiff in a case that has been transferred to MDL 2543 (or pending in another venue) with preserving ignition switch parts covered by NHTSA Recall Campaign 14v-047000 that may be relevant to the plaintiff's claims. To allow New GM to do so, before a recall repair is performed, a named plaintiff (or his or her counsel) must provide both the dealership replacing the ignition switch parts and New GM with reasonable, advance notice that the plaintiff wishes to have parts preserved for purposes of litigation. New GM will then use reasonable efforts to arrange for the dealership making the repair to return the ignition switch parts to New GM for storage and preservation. This Order shall also apply to related cases later filed in, removed to, or transferred to this Court. (As further set forth in this order) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/19/2019) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ne)
December 13, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 205 ORDER NO. 159 [Regarding the End of the Bellwether Trial Process for Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases]: As far as the Court is concerned, the settlement of the last two bellwether cases set for trial brings to a close the bellwether trial process in the MDL. That said, the parties should meet and confer with respect to whether the Court should schedule any additional bellwether trials in light of the settlements. The parties should be prepared to address that issue and, more broadly, the next steps for the remaining cases in Phase 2, Category C - including but not limited to whether or when those cases should be remanded (or transferred) to their respective transferor court - at the next status conference, which is currently scheduled for January 23, 2019. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/12/2018) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ne)
November 28, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 204 ORDER NO. 158 [Regarding Application of the Court's Conclusions to the Fifth Amended Consolidated Complaint]: Accordingly, and for good cause shown, the Court ORDERS as follows: I. APPLICATION OF THE COURT'S CONCLUSIONS OF LAW TO THE 5ACC. A. Statutory Consumer Fraud Claims: Plaintiff Janelle Davis's statutory consumer fraud claim is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to the Court's September 12, 2018 order (Docket No. 6028), subject to Plaintiff's right to appeal. (See 5ACC Paragraph 152). B. Unjust Enrichment Claims: The following Plaintiffs' unjust enrichment claims are dismissed with prejudice pursuant to the Court's September 12, 2018 order (Docket No. 6028), subject to Plaintiffs' right to appeal. (Paragraph citations are to the 5ACC.) II. NO ANSWER TO THE 5ACC REQUIRED. No answer or other response to the 5ACC is required under the Court's prior orders. (See, e.g., Order No. 114 IV, Docket No. 3431; Order No. 131 Paragraph 12, Docket No. 4499; Docket No. 4522 (making clear that the only changes from the Fourth Amended Consolidated Complaint to the 5ACC were to substitute plaintiffs, not to substantively alter any allegations or claims)). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 11/27/2018) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ne)
November 8, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 203 ORDER NO. 157 [Regarding the November 2, 2018 Status Conference]: The Court, having held a status conference on November 2, 2018, and having given counsel an opportunity to be heard on the agenda items set forth in the parties' October 26, 2018 tentative agenda letter and the Court's November 1, 2018 Order (Docket Nos. 6220, 6250), issues this Order to memorialize the actions taken and rulings made at the status conference. I. NEXT STATUS CONFERENCE A status conference will be held Wednesday, January 23, 2019, at 9:00 a.m. EST in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. Upon reflection, the Court agrees with Lead Counsel that it is appropriate to set at least a tentative date for the economic loss bellwether trial. Unless and until the Court orders otherwise, trial will begin on Monday, January 13, 2020, at 9:00 a.m. (For now, the Court is allotting a maximum of five weeks for the trial.) The parties should be prepared to address at a future status conference a proposed schedule for pretrial deadlines. V. SETTLEMENT Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the parties should continue to keep the Court apprised of developments regarding settlement. SO ORDERED. (Jury Trial set for 1/13/2020 at 09:00 AM before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 1/23/2019 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 11/8/2018) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ne)
October 4, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 202 ORDER NO. 156 [Regarding Next Steps for Pre-Sale Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs Subject to Order No. 148 Motions or Notices]: On June 22, 2018, the Court entered Order No. 152, directing Lead Counsel and counsel for New GM to meet and confer and submit joint or competing letters to the Court regarding next steps for certain Pre-Sale plaintiffs who filed amended and severed complaints pursuant to the Order No. 148 motions and notices process. (See Order No. 152, Docket No. 5789, at Paragraph 4.) On September 26, 2018, after meeting and conferring, Lead Counsel and counsel for New GM submitted a joint letter proposing next steps for these plaintiffs. The Court hereby adopts and orders the following procedures. 2. "No Plausibly Pleaded Defect/Causation" Cases: By Wednesday, December 5, 2018, with respect to the Pre-Sale Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs' operative complaints, New GM may file on the main MDL docket motions to dismiss the claims of those Pre-Sale Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs (if any) that New GM believes fail to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). By Wednesday, January 9, 2019, counsel for Pre-Sale Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs included in the motions shall file on the main MDL docket (1) a list of the plaintiffs who agree to voluntarily dismiss their claims; (2) a list of plaintiffs as to whom counsel plans to move to withdraw; and (3) a list of the plaintiffs who intend to press their claims (specifically identifying which plaintiffs intend to amend their complaints). By Tuesday, January 29, 2019, those Pre-Sale Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs who agree to dismiss their claims will file voluntary dismissals, and counsel for Pre-Sale Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs who intend to withdraw will file motions to withdraw. 3. Statute of Limitations/Repose Cases: By Wednesday, December 5, 2018, with respect to the Pre-Sale Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs' operative complaints, New GM may file on the main MDL docket a notice identifying which claimants (if any) it believes are barred by the applicable statutes of limitation or repose. By Wednesday, January 9, 2019, counsel for Pre-Sale Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs included in the notice shall file on the main MDL docket (1) a list of the plaintiffs who agree to voluntarily dismiss their claims; (2) a list of plaintiffs as to whom counsel plans to move to withdraw; and (3) a list of the plaintiffs who intend to press their claims, along with the basis as to why those plaintiffs believe their claims are not barred. By Tuesday, January 29, 2019, those Pre-Sale Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs who agree to dismiss their claims will file voluntary dismissals, and counsel for Pre-Sale Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs who intend to withdraw will file motions to withdraw. (As further set forth in this order) SO ORDERED. (Motions due by 1/29/2019.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/4/2018) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ne)
September 12, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 201 OPINION AND ORDER [Regarding Application of the Court's Prior Rulings on Manifestation, Incidental Damages (Lost Time), and Unjust Enrichment to All Remaining Jurisdictions in Dispute (MDL Order No. 131 Issues)]: In short, for all jurisdictions in dispute, the Court finds that manifestation is not required to bring statutory consumer protection, common-law fraud, and implied warranty claims. Second, for all but six of the jurisdictions in dispute, the Court finds that Plaintiffs may recover lost-time damages where "lost time" is understood as lost earnings or its equivalent, but not where "lost time" is understood as "lost personal time." In Colorado, New York, Ohio, Utah, Virginia, however, Plaintiffs may also recover lost personal time under the states' consumer protection statutes, and in Oklahoma, Plaintiffs may recover lost personal time for all claims. Finally, in every one of the ten still-disputed jurisdictions other than Connecticut, a plaintiff may plead unjust enrichment in the alternative only where the validity or enforceability of a contract is in question, and in seven out of the ten jurisdictions (all but Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island), a plaintiff may not maintain an unjust enrichment claim if he or she has an adequate remedy at law. Attached as Exhibit A is a chart summarizing the Court's conclusions of law for all jurisdictions. The parties are directed to meet and confer and, within thirty days of the date of this Opinion and Order, shall jointly submit a stipulation and proposed order applying the Court's conclusions to the Plaintiffs and claims in the 5ACC. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 9/12/2018) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ne)
August 27, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 200 ORDER NO. 154 [REGARDING THE AUGUST 21, 2018 STATUS CONFERENCE]: The Court, having held a Status Conference on August 21, 2018, and having given counsel an opportunity to be heard on the agenda items set forth in the parties' August 17, 2018 tentative agenda letter and the Court's August 20, 2018 Order (Docket Nos. 5942, 5946), issues this Order to memorialize the actions taken and rulings made at the Status Conference. I. NEXT STATUS CONFERENCE: A Status Conference will be held Friday, November 2, 2018, at 9:30 a.m. EDT in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. III. PERSONAL INJURY SUCCESSOR LIABILITY ISSUES: Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the Court adopts the following schedule as next steps for personal injury successor liability issues: (i) by Friday, November 9, 2018, New GM will submit its opening brief, not to exceed 35 (double-spaced) pages, on the choice-of-law, domination and control, and implied liability issues raised by plaintiffs (Docket Nos. 5083, 5631); (ii) by Tuesday, December 18, 2018, plaintiffs will submit their consolidated response, not to exceed 35 (double-spaced) pages; (iii) by Friday, January 4, 2019, counsel for individual plaintiffs may file supplemental responses with leave of Court for good cause shown; and (iv) by Friday, January 25, 2019, New GM will submit its reply, not to exceed 15 (double-spaced) pages. VII. ECONOMIC LOSS EXPERT ISSUES: Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the parties shall meet and confer by Monday, September 3, 2018 regarding the sur-rebuttal expert reports to be served by plaintiffs consistent with the Court's August 21, 2018 Order (Docket No. 5952). If the parties cannot resolve their dispute, New GM shall file a letter motion no later than Tuesday, September 4, 2018, and Lead Counsel will file their opposition by Wednesday, September 5, 2018. Further, by Wednesday, November 14, 2018, the parties shall submit a joint letter providing their position(s) on the necessity of a Daubert hearing. (Motions due by 11/9/2018, Responses due by 12/18/2018, Replies due by 1/25/2019. Status Conference set for 11/2/2018 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/27/2018) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ne)
July 30, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 199 ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the next status conference in this matter, previously scheduled for August 17, 2018, is ADJOURNED to August 21, 2018, at 9:30 a.m. Counsel shall promptly update the MDL website with the new time. SO ORDERED. (Status Conference set for 8/21/2018 at 09:30 AM before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/30/2018) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ne)
July 2, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 198 ORDER NO. 153 [Regarding Next Steps for Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs Subject to Order No. 140 Motions or Notices]: The Court hereby adopts and orders the following procedures. Identification of "Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs": 1. By Friday, July 20, 2018, New GM and Lead Counsel shall file on the main MDL docket a joint list of "Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs," which may include (i) the Plaintiffs who filed amended complaints pursuant to Order No. 146 and whose complaints no longer allege any ignition-switch or key-rotation claims; and (ii) additional Post-Sale order personal injury claimants whose complaints (as currently pled, including through amendment if necessary) do not allege any ignition-switch or key-rotation claims. These plaintiffs are referred to herein as the 'Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs." Motion and Notice Practice: 2. "No Plausibly Pled Defect/Causation" Cases: By Monday, August 20, 2018, with respect to the Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs operative complaints, New GM may file on the main MDL docket motions to dismiss the claims of those Non-Ignition Switch Plaintiffs (if any) that New GM believes fail to state a claim under Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 12(b)(6). (As further set forth in this order) (Motions due by 8/20/2018.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/2/2018) As per Chambers, Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ne) Modified on 8/17/2018 (ne).
June 22, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 197 ORDER NO. 152 [Regarding Next Steps for Certain Plaintiffs Subject to Order No. 148 Notices or Motions]: By Friday, August 10, 2018, New GM may file a consolidated summary judgment motion against any of the plaintiffs in Exhibit A whose claims New GM continues to believe are subject to summary judgment because there is no genuine issue of triable fact on air bag deployment. By Friday, September 7, 2018, Lead Counsel will file a consolidated summary judgment opposition brief on behalf of the plaintiffs subject to New GMs motion for summary judgment. Individual counsel for any plaintiff in Exhibit A may file on the main MDL docket a supplemental opposition with leave of Court (for good cause shown) by Friday, September 14, 2018. By Friday, September 28, 2018, New GM may file a consolidated reply. By Monday, July 2, 2018, the plaintiffs in Exhibit B shall show cause on the main MDL docket as to why their ignition switch and/or key rotation defect claims should not be dismissed. Attached as Exhibit C is a list of the eight plaintiffs who have indicated that they intend to amend their complaints. By Monday, July 23, 2018, each of the plaintiffs in Exhibit C shall (1) for plaintiffs whose claims are not pending in a consolidated or multiple plaintiff complaint, file an amended complaint; or (2) for plaintiffs whose claims are pending in a consolidated or multiple-plaintiff complaint, file in this District, in the form of a new lawsuit, an amended and severed complaint and shall pay the filing fee associated with filing a complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1914(a). Within two weeks of the first date upon which any plaintiff in Exhibit B or Exhibit C is dismissed with prejudice, Lead Counsel and counsel for New GM shall meet and confer and submit joint or competing letters to the Court proposing the next steps for plaintiffs who filed amended and severed complaints. (Amended Pleadings due by 7/23/2018, Motions due by 8/10/2018, Responses due by 9/7/2018, Replies due by 9/28/2018.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/22/2018) As per Chambers, Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ne) Modified on 8/17/2018 (ne).
June 7, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 196 ORDER NO. 151. [Regarding Wave Two Discovery Procedures]. Consistent with the Court's comments at the May 31, 2018 Status Conference, and for good cause shown, the Court adopts the following schedule and procedures for Wave Two Discovery of the Post-Sale Production Part and Service Part personal injury and wrongful death cases, and as further specified and set forth in this Order No. 151. By Thursday, August 30, 2018, each Wave Two plaintiff shall refile their complaint or an amended complaint in this Court and pay any filing fee associated with filing a complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1914(a) or be dismissed without prejudice. By Thursday, September 27, 2018, any such dismissal without prejudice will automatically convert to a dismissal with prejudice unless any such dismissed Wave Two plaintiff refiles their amended complaint and pays the required filing fee in accordance with this order, and as further set forth in this Order. Targeted, case-specific fact discovery of Wave Two plaintiffs shall commence on Wednesday, August 1, 2018, and shall conclude by Friday, December 21, 2018. Wave Two plaintiffs shall present their expert witnesses for deposition on or before Thursday, February 28, 2019, and as further specified and set forth in this Order No. 151. By Thursday, March 7, 2019, New GM and Lead Counsel shall meet and confer regarding proposed next steps for Wave Two cases and remaining Production Part and Service Part plaintiffs, and submit joint or competing letter briefs (not to exceed ten single-spaced pages) setting forth their positions. SO ORDERED. (Amended Pleadings due by 8/30/2018. Deposition due by 2/28/2019. Fact Discovery due by 12/21/2018.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/6/2018) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al., as per Chambers. (rjm).
June 6, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 195 ORDER NO. 150 [Regarding the May 31, 2018 Status Conference]: A Status Conference will be held Friday, August 17, 2018, at 9:30 a.m. EDT in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. (The Court notes that that date is different from the date discussed at the status conference, as one of Co-Lead Counsel is unavailable on the date previously selected and the Court has been advised that all counsel are available on August 17, 2018. Counsel shall promptly update the MDL website with the new date.) Consistent with the Court's comments as the Status Conference, by Thursday, June 14, 2018, the parties shall submit a joint letter or competing letters (not to exceed five single-spaced pages each) regarding the implications for the MDL of the Court's May 29, 2018 Opinion and Order regarding certain bankruptcy appeals. (Docket No. 5618). Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the parties should meet and confer on which of the remaining 35 jurisdictions would apply the law of Delaware or New York and report back and propose next steps on the following schedule: by Friday, July 13, 2018, New GM will provide economic loss and personal injury plaintiffs with a list of: jurisdictions among the 35 not previously addressed by the Court with choice-of-law rules that would select Delaware or New York law. By Friday, July 27, 2018, plaintiffs will provide to New GM their position on GM's list and legal conclusions. By Friday, August 3, 2018, the parties will meet and confer. By Friday, August 10, 2018, if any states remain in dispute, plaintiffs and New GM will report back to the Court and propose next steps, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/6/2018) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
June 5, 2018 Filing 194 MEMO ENDORSEMENT granting (5639 in case 14-md-2543) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. ENDORSEMENT: The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Lanson L. Bordelon as an attorney in 14-MD-2543, 17-CV-6338, 17-CV-6486, 17-CV-7441, 17-CV-8068, and 17-CV-9323. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543, Docket No. 5639. (Attorney Lanson Bordelon terminated.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/5/2018) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras) Modified on 6/5/2018 (ras).
June 4, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 193 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: (163 in 1:15-cv-02638-JMF, 88 in 1:16-cv-06833-JMF, 122 in 1:15-cv-07841-JMF, 5632 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 29 in 1:17-cv-09522-JMF, 271 in 1:14-cv-08385-JMF) NEW GM'S NOTICE OF NON-COMPLIANCE AS TO SEVEN CLAIMANTS WHO HAVE NOT COMPLIED WITH ORDER NO. 148 filed by General Motors LLC. ENDORSEMENT: New GM's application for dismissal without prejudice is denied without prejudice. The Court will instead follow the same procedure it established for Order No. 140. (See MDL Docket Nos. 5107 & 5201). To that end, counsel for the represented claimants in the above list shall comply with their obligations under Order No. 148 (Docket No. 5366) by June 11, 2018, or face sanctions, up to and including dismissal of the relevant claimant's claims. Mindful that the procedures set forth in Section I of Order No. 148 are directed at counsel, any renewed application with respect to the two pro se claimants listed above (Lisa Marino and John Patton) shall be accompanied by a proposed order, geared to pro se litigants, setting forth in plain language what the claimants' options are in responding to New GM's notices and the consequences of failing to respond. The proposed order shall also include information concerning the submission of materials by pro se litigants and information concerning the Pro Se Clinic (akin to the orders the Court has entered previously). Finally, the proposed order shall give pro se claimants at least three weeks to respond to New GM's notices under Section I of Order No. 148. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/4/2018) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al, as per Chambers.(mro) Modified on 6/6/2018 (mro).
April 25, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 192 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER [Regarding New GM's Motion for Partial Reconsideration of the Court's December 19, 2017 Order and Opinion on Successor Liability] re: (4936 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION for Reconsideration re; (4888) Memorandum & Opinion filed by General Motors LLC. The Court concludes that Plaintiffs cannot demonstrate continuity of ownership within the meaning of New York law, and thus cannot advance successor liability claims in any state where New York law applies. It follows that New GM's motion for partial reconsideration must be and is GRANTED and that the successor liability claims of Plaintiffs from Texas and Virginia must be and are DISMISSED. See Dec. 19, 2017 Op., 2017 WL 6509256, at *7 (holding that Texas and Virginia apply New York Law); Aug. 3, 2017 Op., 2017 WL 3382071, at *19 (same). The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 4936. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/25/2018)**Pursuant to instructions from Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(anc)
April 12, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 191 ORDER NO. 148 [AMENDED] [Regarding Next Steps For Pre-Sale Personal Injury Claims]: It is hereby ORDERED that: By Friday, April 13, 2018, General Motors LLC ("New GM") will file on the main MDL docket a list of pre-Sale plaintiffs that it has currently identified as ones it believes should be dismissed in light of the Court's December 28, 2017 Opinion and Order. See In Re General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litig., 2017 WL 6729295, at *1 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 28, 2017)...By Friday, April 13, 2018, New GM will file its motion to dismiss claims that New GM believes should be dismissed for failure to state a claim...If New GM files a motion to dismiss with prejudice, any opposition shall be filed two weeks after the motion's filing. New GM's reply, if any, shall be filed one week thereafter. Counsel is advised to file all documents related to motions to dismiss pursuant to Order Nos. 25 and 45 in 14-MD-2543 and to "spread" the filings to any relevant individual member case or cases, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/10/2018 nunc pro tunc) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
April 10, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 190 ORDER NO. 148 [Regarding Next Steps For Pre-Sale Personal Injury Claims]: By Friday, April 13, 2018, New GM will file its motion to dismiss claims that New GM believes should be dismissed for failure to state a claim. By Monday, May 21, 2018, those plaintiffs who agree to dismiss will file voluntary dismissals, and counsel for plaintiffs who intend to withdraw will file motions to withdraw....Counsel is advised to file all documents related to motions to dismiss pursuant to Order Nos. 25 and 45 in 14-MD-2543 and to "spread" the filings to any relevant individual member case or cases, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/10/2018) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
April 3, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 189 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: re: (4679 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION for Summary Judgment Against Plaintiffs' Claims for Benefit-of-the-Bargain Damages filed by General Motors LLC. Accordingly, New GM's motion for summary judgment as to Plaintiffs' claims for benefit-of-the-bargain damages is DENIED without prejudice. Counsel should confer on whether and how the motion should be renewed and be prepared to address that question at a future status conference. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 4679. And as set forth herein. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/03/2018) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ama) Modified on 4/3/2018 (ama).
March 29, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 188 ORDER NO. 147 [Regarding the March 22, 2018 Status Conference]: A Status Conference will be held Thursday, May 31, 2018, at 9:30 a.m. EDT in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York....Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the parties should continue to keep the Court apprised of developments regarding settlement, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/29/2018) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras) Modified on 3/29/2018 (ras).
March 29, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 187 ORDER NO. 146 [Regarding Next Steps for Certain Plaintiffs Subject to Order No. 140 Notices]: By Monday, April 30, 2018, each of the plaintiffs in Exhibit A shall (1) for plaintiffs whose claims are not pending in a consolidated or multiple-plaintiff complaint, file an amended complaint; or (2) for plaintiffs whose claims are pending in a consolidated or multiple-plaintiff complaint, file in this District, in the form of a new lawsuit, an amended and severed complaint and shall pay the filing fee associated with filing a complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1914(a). Any such dismissal without prejudice will convert to a dismissal with prejudice upon a second notice of non-compliance filed by New GM without further notice or hearing unless any such dismissed plaintiff in Exhibit A refiles his or her amended complaint and pays the required filing fee by Wednesday, May 30, 2018. By Friday, May 25, 2018, Lead Counsel will file a consolidated summary judgment opposition brief on behalf of the plaintiffs subject to New GM's motion for summary judgment. Individual counsel for any plaintiff in Exhibit B may file a supplemental opposition with leave of Court (for good cause shown) by Friday, June 1, 2018. By Friday, June 15, 2018, New GM will file a consolidated reply...Within two weeks of the first date upon which any plaintiff subject to Paragraph 1 or 3 of this Order (relating to the filing of amended and severed complaints in certain cases) is dismissed with prejudice, Lead Counsel and counsel for New GM shall meet and confer and submit joint or competing letters to the Court proposing the next steps for plaintiffs who filed amended and severed complaints pursuant to this Order, including whether such cases should remain in the MDL. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/29/2018) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
March 27, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 186 ORDER NO. 144 [Regarding the Filing of Amended and Severed Complaints]: At the Court's direction, certain plaintiffs ("Amending Plaintiffs") who had previously been named in omnibus or consolidated complaints or whose attorneys withdrew as counsel have been required, or will be required, to file amended and severed complaints as new cases in this Court. (See e.g., MDL Docket No. 5074 ("Order No. 141"), paragraph 8; MDL Docket No. 4840 ("Order No. 137"), paragraph 3; MDL Docket No. 5108 ("Order No. 142"), paragraph 2). Per the Court's Orders, each Amending Plaintiff is required to file with his or her new complaint a Related Case Statement, available at www.nysd.uscourts.gov/forms.php, identifying the new lawsuit as related to these proceedings (In General Motors Ignition Switch Litigation, 14-MD-2543 (JMF)). To facilitate the assignment of these new cases to the undersigned for inclusion in the MDL and the orderly termination of Amending Plaintiffs from their initial dockets (as of the date of the newly filed amended and severed complaint), each Amending Plaintiff shall (1) prominently note in the Related Case Statement that he or she is an existing plaintiff in an existing case, citing the case name and docket number of that case; (2) reference in the Related Case Statement the MDL Order pursuant to which he or she is filing an amended and severed complaint; and (3) attach as an exhibit to the Related Case Statement a copy of the original complaint in which the Amending Plaintiff is already associated. If the Court grants a motion to withdraw as counsel and a plaintiff will be proceeding pro se and be required to file an amended and severed complaint, withdrawing counsel shall promptly serve a copy of this Order on those plaintiffs and file proof of such service. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/27/2018) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
March 23, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 185 ORDER NO. 143 [Regarding Procedures for Responses to Pending Motions to Withdraw Filed in Response to Order No. 140 and Procedures for Responses to Any Such Future Motions to Withdraw]: Any opposition to the Firms' Motions - by the Affected Plaintiffs themselves, New GM, or otherwise - shall be filed no later than twenty-one (21) days from the date of this Order (that is, by Friday, April 13, 2018). The Firms reply, if any, shall be filed as a consolidated reply no later than seven (7) days thereafter (that is, by Friday, April 20, 2018), and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/23/2018) As Per Chamber,s Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
March 14, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 184 ORDER terminating (242) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-02458-JMF; terminating (240) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-02713-JMF; terminating (242) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-02714-JMF; terminating (238) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-03326-JMF; terminating (235) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-03298-JMF; terminating (5210) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. ; terminating (5212) Motion to Seal Document in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF; terminating (269) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04226-JMF; terminating (253) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04265-JMF; terminating (293) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04267-JMF; terminating (278) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04268-JMF; terminating (252) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04270-JMF; terminating (280) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04272-JMF; terminating (251) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04273-JMF; terminating (245) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04338-JMF; terminating (284) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04339-JMF; terminating (238) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04340-JMF; terminating (309) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04342-JMF; terminating (252) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04345-JMF; terminating (258) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04346-JMF; terminating (245) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04348-JMF; terminating (245) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04350-JMF; terminating (249) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04630-JMF; terminating (243) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04632-JMF; terminating (238) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04637-JMF; terminating (240) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04641-JMF; terminating (246) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04650-JMF; terminating (236) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04661-JMF; terminating (241) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04662-JMF; terminating (238) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04667-JMF; terminating (239) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04672-JMF; terminating (245) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04676-JMF; terminating (238) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04684-JMF; terminating (233) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04686-JMF; terminating (246) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04690-JMF; terminating (256) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04691-JMF; terminating (255) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04692-JMF; terminating (240) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04685-JMF; terminating (260) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04699-JMF; terminating (257) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04701-JMF; terminating (246) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04702-JMF; terminating (244) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04704-JMF; terminating (250) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04707-JMF; terminating (236) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04714-JMF; terminating (253) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04715-JMF; terminating (250) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04717-JMF; terminating (241) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04720-JMF; terminating (263) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04727-JMF; terminating (239) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04731-JMF; terminating (244) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04732-JMF; terminating (244) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04738-JMF; terminating (245) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04741-JMF; terminating (288) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04751-JMF; terminating (247) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04752-JMF; terminating (245) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04754-JMF; terminating (247) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04755-JMF; terminating (268) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04756-JMF; terminating (239) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04758-JMF; terminating (231) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04759-JMF; terminating (231) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04760-JMF; terminating (237) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04764-JMF; terminating (239) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04768-JMF; terminating (242) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04771-JMF; terminating (259) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04775-JMF; terminating (241) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04778-JMF; terminating (232) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04781-JMF; terminating (236) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04784-JMF; terminating (240) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04798-JMF; terminating (242) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04799-JMF; terminating (231) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04801-JMF; terminating (239) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04802-JMF; terminating (250) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04804-JMF; terminating (253) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04808-JMF; terminating (238) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04810-JMF; terminating (247) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04811-JMF; terminating (232) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04857-JMF; terminating (233) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04858-JMF; terminating (240) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-04859-JMF; terminating (218) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05035-JMF; terminating (232) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05137-JMF; terminating (231) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05323-JMF; terminating (233) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05325-JMF; terminating (250) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05326-JMF; terminating (271) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05331-JMF; terminating (227) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05332-JMF; terminating (409) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05336-JMF; terminating (220) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05338-JMF; terminating (236) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05340-JMF; terminating (227) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05345-JMF; terminating (220) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05347-JMF; terminating (242) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05349-JMF; terminating (231) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05350-JMF; terminating (237) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05351-JMF; terminating (230) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05356-JMF; terminating (226) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05358-JMF; terminating (223) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05328-JMF; terminating (233) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05458-JMF; terminating (261) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05461-JMF; terminating (232) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05501-JMF; terminating (231) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05503-JMF; terminating (221) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05506-JMF; terminating (224) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05746-JMF; terminating (225) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05750-JMF; terminating (222) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05752-JMF; terminating (224) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05754-JMF; terminating (221) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05715-JMF; terminating (227) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05880-JMF; terminating (240) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05881-JMF; terminating (225) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05850-JMF; terminating (572) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-05810-JMF; terminating (248) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-06018-JMF; terminating (212) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-06830-JMF; terminating (244) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-06924-JMF; terminating (219) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-07224-JMF; terminating (204) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-07242-JMF; terminating (212) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-07474-JMF; terminating (211) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-07475-JMF; terminating (219) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-07477-JMF; terminating (219) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-07623-JMF; terminating (228) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-07631-JMF; terminating (198) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-07977-JMF; terminating (198) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-07979-JMF; terminating (209) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-08130-JMF; terminating (216) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-08133-JMF; terminating (207) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-08134-JMF; terminating (778) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-08176-JMF; terminating (231) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-08382-JMF; terminating (259) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-08385-JMF; terminating (215) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-08386-JMF; terminating (549) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-08317-JMF; terminating (193) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-08248-JMF; terminating (242) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-08540-JMF; terminating (187) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney, in case 1:14-cv-08883-JMF; terminating (188) Motion
March 13, 2018 Filing 183 MOTION for Robert C. Hillard and Thomas J. Henry to Withdraw as Attorney for Plaintiffs listed on Exhibit A. Document filed by Brenda Gregory, Jennifer Lankford. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Hilliard, Robert)
February 26, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 182 ORDER NO. 142 [Regarding Withdrawal of Representation by Hilliard-Henry as to Certain Plaintiffs]: It is hereby ORDERED that: 1. As a condition of withdrawal, the Firms shall, no later than March 2, 2018, serve upon each of the Affected Plaintiffs (1) a copy of the "Notice to Certain Plaintiffs in General Motors Ignition Switch Litigation" attached hereto as Exhibit B; (2) a copy of this Order; and (3) a copy of this Court's Individual Rules and Practices for Pro Se Cases, which is attached to this Order as Exhibit C. The Firms shall file proof of such service no later than March 5, 2018. Each of the Affected Plaintiffs is hereby ordered to file, in the form of a new lawsuit, an amended and severed complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York within ninety (90) days that is, by May 24, 2018 and to pay any filing fee associated with filing a complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1914(a). New GM shall promptly serve Affected Plaintiffs with any Order issued by the Court that may affect their rights and file proof of such service. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/26/2018) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
February 20, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 181 ORDER NO. 141 [Regarding Next Steps for the Post-Sale Production Part and Service Part and Category C Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases]: Targeted, case-specific fact discovery of Wave One plaintiffs shall commence on Monday, February 26, 2018, and shall conclude by Thursday, August 2, 2018. Wave One plaintiffs shall present their expert witnesses for deposition on or before Friday, October 5, 2018. Fact discovery in the Category C Replacement Early Trial Candidates will commence on the date the Court makes its selection for the two bellwether trials and will conclude no later than Monday, July 16, 2018. Expert discovery in the Category C Replacement Early Trial Candidates will take place as follows: Lead Counsel shall disclose their expert witnesses and submit any reports required under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) on or before Friday, August 17, 2018. Lead Counsel shall present their expert witnesses for deposition on or before Friday, September 14, 2018. New GM shall disclose expert witnesses and submit any reports required under Fed. R. Civ. P. 2(a)(2)(B) on or before Friday, September 28, 2018. New GM shall present its expert witnesses for deposition on or before Friday, October 19, 2018. Absent good cause, no rebuttal expert reports shall be permitted. Expert discovery for the Category C Replacement Early Trial Candidates shall conclude by Friday, October 19, 2018. By Friday, October 12, 2018, the parties will meet and confer and submit a joint proposed order regarding deadlines for submitting any Daubert motions, dispositive motions, and motions in limine for Bellwether Trial Nos. 12 and 13. By that same date, the parties should submit joint or competing letters addressing the order of trials and setting forth the parties' supporting rationales for their proposed orders. The Court will then designate the order of the Category C Replacement Early Trial Candidates. Bellwether Trial Nos. 12 and 13 will commence on January 28, 2019 and March 25, 2019, respectively. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/20/2018) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
February 14, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 180 ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the next status conference in this matter, previously scheduled to begin at 9:30 a.m. on March 23, 2018, will begin instead at 1:30 p.m. Counsel shall promptly update the MDL website with the new time. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/14/2018) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras) Modified on 2/16/2018 (ras).
January 31, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 179 ORDER OF DISMISSAL: The Unrepresented Plaintiffs' claims are DISMISSED without prejudice. Should Unrepresented Plaintiffs fail to move to reopen their cases within forty-five days of the date of this Order, New GM may again move to dismiss their claims with prejudice; any opposition to such a motion would be due within twenty-one days; any reply would be due within seven days of any opposition. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543, Docket No. 4851, and to mail to the Unrepresented Plaintiffs a copy of this Order, as well as a copy of this Court's Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Pro Se Cases, available at http://nysd.uscourts.gov/judge/Furman. (Motions terminated: (4851 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs with Prejudice for Failure to Comply with the Court's October 10, 2017 Order (ECF 4696), filed by General Motors LLC.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 1/30/2018) As Per Chamber, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
January 29, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 178 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: (4875 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) LETTER MOTION to Compel Lead Counsel to produce the documents withheld in response to New GM's September 22, 2017 Requests for Production addressed to Judge Jesse M. Furman from Andrew B. Bloomer, P.C. dated December 15, 2017, filed by General Motors LLC. Upon review of the parties' submissions (GM Ltr. Mot.; Pls.' Opp'n; Pls.' Supp. Ltr.; Docket No. 4966 ("GM Supp. Br.")), including an in camera review of the materials at issue, the Court grants New GM's motion with respect to the Questionnaires and denies its motion with respect to the E-mails. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 4875, and as further set forth herein, (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 1/29/2018) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
January 26, 2018 Filing 177 FILING ERROR - ELECTRONIC FILING OF NON-ECF DOCUMENT - NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the plaintiff(s) and or their counsel(s), hereby give notice that the above-captioned action is voluntarily dismissed, With prejudice against the defendant(s) All Defendants. Document filed by Potts Law Firm LLP. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Jensen, Eric) Modified on 1/29/2018 (km).
December 22, 2017 Filing 176 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL AS COUNSEL: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the following attorneys hereby withdraw as counsel of record for Defendant General Motors LLC in the above-referenced actions, and respectfully request that their names be removed from the court's electronic mail notice list and counsel's service list: Heather A. Bloom, Ebony S. Johnson, and Catherine E. Stahl. Kirkland & Ellis LLP continues to serve as counsel for Defendant General Motors LLC in the above-referenced actions through Richard C. Godfrey, P.C., and Andrew B. Bloomer, P.C., who are registered as Electronic Filing Users on the CM/ECF system, and request that all future correspondence and papers in this action continue to be directed to them and all other attorneys at Kirkland & Ellis LLP serving as counsel of record in these matters. (Attorney Catherine E. Stahl; Heather A. Bloom and Ebony Sunala Johnson terminated.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/21/2017) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras) Modified on 12/26/2017 (ras). Modified on 12/26/2017 (ras).
December 19, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 175 OPINION AND ORDER [Regarding New GM's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Successor Liability] re: (3519 in case 14-md-2543) MOTION for Summary Judgment on Successor Liability. New GM's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiffs' successor liability claims under Maryland law, but DENIED with respect to Plaintiffs' claims under the other laws of the other eight jurisdictions still at issue. Per Docket No. 4831, the parties shall submit letters regarding the next steps for personal injury cases in the MDL, addressing the implications of this Opinion and Order among other things, by the earlier of (1) one week after the Court's ruling on the pending motions in the Phase Two, Category B cases; or (2) January 3, 2018, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/19/2017) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras) Modified on 12/20/2017 (ras).
December 8, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 174 ORDER NO. 139 [Prohibiting the Filing of Consolidated Personal Injury / Wrongful Death Complaints]: Heretofore, the Court has tolerated the filing of omnibus consolidated complaints on behalf of multiple plaintiffs bringing personal injury and wrongful death claims arising out of different accidents or incidents. The Court has done so, even where joinder would not be permitted under a strict application of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, in the interests of efficiency. Upon reflection, the Court has decided to put an end to the practice because it creates administrative problems for the Clerk's Office (problems that will become even more pronounced if or when individual cases are transferred or remanded to transferor courts) and because it deprives the Court of filing fees to which it is due. (Requiring each plaintiff to pay a separate filing fee has an additional salutary effect: It helps ensure that plaintiff's counsel will adequately screen each plaintiff's claim to ensure that it is valid and belongs in these proceedings.) Accordingly, effective immediately, counsel may no longer file consolidated complaints on behalf of multiples plaintiffs where joinder would not be permitted under the Federal Rules. Counsel shall instead file individual complaints (along with the requisite Statement of Relatedness) with separate filing fees for each case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/08/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ama)
December 4, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 173 ORDER: On October 10, 2017, the Court granted the request of Steve W. Berman and Elizabeth J. Cabraser to withdraw as counsel for Plaintiffs Dion Jones, Carmel Justis, and Tajah Liddy ("Unrepresented Plaintiffs") and ordered the Unrepresented Plaintiffs to either retain new counsel or move for permission to become Electronic Case Filing ("ECF") users by November 13, 2017 (see Docket No. 4696). The Unrepresented Plaintiffs failed to do so and New GM now moves to dismiss Unrepresented Plaintiffs' claims with prejudice (Docket No. 4851). Unrepresented Plaintiffs shall file any opposition to New GM's motion to dismiss with prejudice no later than January 15, 2018 and New GM shall file any reply no later than January 29, 2018. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail to the Unrepresented Plaintiffs a copy of this Order and a copy of New GM's motion to dismiss with prejudice (Docket No. 4851), as well as a copy of this Court's Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Pro Se Cases, available at http://nysd.uscourts.gov/judge/Furman. ( Responses due by 1/15/2018, Replies due by 1/29/2018.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/4/2017) Filed In All Member Cases, 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al., pursuant to instructions from Chambers. (mro)
November 29, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 172 ORDER NO. 138 [Regarding Discovery of Expert Witness Materials Relating to Economic Loss Claims]: Lead Counsel for the MDL Plaintiffs and Counsel for General Motors LLC stipulate and agree to this Order regarding the scope of discovery of expert-related materials in connection with economic claims asserted in MDL 2543...The parties agree that a deposition notice shall be sufficient to require any witness designated as a testifying expert to appear for a deposition. Absent good cause shown, no subpoena shall be served on a testifying expert. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 11/29/2017) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
November 21, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 171 ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the next status conference in this matter, previously scheduled for December 4, 2017, at 9:30 a.m, is ADJOURNED to January 8, 2018, at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. Counsel shall promptly update the MDL website with the new date and time. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 11/21/2017) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
November 15, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 170 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER [Regarding Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to Amend the Fourth Amended Consolidated Complaint and New GM's Partial Cross-Motion to Dismiss and/or Strike Plaintiffs' Proposed Fifth Amended Consolidated Complaint] re: (4522 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION to Amend/Correct (3356) Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to Amend the Fourth Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint, filed by GM Ignition Switch MDL Plaintiffs, (4704 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION to Dismiss and/or Strike Plaintiff's Proposed Fifth Amended Consolidated Complaint, filed by General Motors LLC. Upon review of the parties' submissions (Docket Nos. 4522, 4680, 4704, 4767, 4775), the Court grants Plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend. The Court declines to consider the second argument because the Bankruptcy Court's ruling is the subject of pending appeals to this Court. There is little point in addressing the argument until the appeals are resolved. For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend the FACC and DENIES New GM's motion to dismiss and/or strike, except to the extent that it concerns claims that the Court previously dismissed and claims on behalf of new Plaintiffs that the Court previously found unviable for similarly situated Plaintiffs. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket Nos. 4522 and 4704, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 11/15/2017) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
November 9, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 169 OPINION AND ORDER: re: (42 in 1:17-cv-04150-JMF, 4425 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION to Remand to State Court, filed by Amber Synott. For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes that this case must be remanded to the Superior Court for the Judicial District of Waterbury, Connecticut. The Court recognizes that that conclusion comes at a cost. As this Court has observed, "[p]utting aside the natural temptation to find federal jurisdiction every time a [high] dollar case with national implications arrives at the doorstep of a federal court,... the federal courts undoubtedly have advantages over their state counterparts when it comes to managing a set of substantial cases filed in jurisdictions throughout the country." Standard & Poor's, 23 F. Supp. 3d. at 413 (internal quotation marks, citations, and brackets omitted). The present MDL illustrates many of those advantages, as the Court has largely been able to manage and oversee the claims of several thousand plaintiffs in a manner that promotes efficiency and minimizes the risks of inconsistent rulings and unnecessary duplication of effort. Nevertheless, as the Court has made clear, it also has tools to promote coordination with related cases pending in state court through communication with the judges presiding over those cases. (See 14MD2543, Docket No. 315 (Order No. 15) (establishing procedures for coordinated discovery in this MDL and related state court proceedings)). "[I]n any event, as any student of the Constitution knows, efficiency is not the only interest served by this country's federalist system of state and federal courts." Standard & Poor's, 23 F. Supp. 3d at 413. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 4425 and 17-CV-4150 Docket No. 42, to remand 17-CV-4150 back to the Superior Court for the Judicial District of Waterbury, Connecticut, and to then close 17-CV-4150, and as further set forth in this order. Motions terminated: (4425 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 42 in 1:17-cv-04150-JMF) MOTION to Remand to State Court, filed by Amber Synott. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 11/9/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ap)
November 2, 2017 Filing 168 NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS by Robert Ahdoot on behalf of Kimberly Brown, Dan Shipley. New Address: Ahdoot & Wolfson, PC, 10728 Lindbrook Drive, Los Angeles, CA, United States 90024, 3104749111. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Ahdoot, Robert)
October 19, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 167 ORDER terminating (4716) Motion to Withdraw; terminating (4720) Motion to Withdraw; terminating (4724) Motion to Withdraw; terminating (4728) Motion to Withdraw; terminating (4732) Motion to Withdraw; terminating (4738) Motion to Withdraw; terminating (4742) Motion to Withdraw; terminating (4746) Motion to Withdraw; terminating (4750) Motion to Withdraw; terminating (4754) Motion to Withdraw in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. On October 18, 2017, Hilliard Martinez Gonzales, Thomas J. Henry Injury Attorneys, and Matthews & Associates (the "Firms") filed a Motion to Withdraw as Co-Counsel for those Plaintiffs listed on Exhibit A of the Motion. (MDL Docket No. 4712). For some reason, counsel appear to have filed identical versions of the Motion eleven times. (See also MDL Docket Nos. 4716, 4720, 4724, 4728, 4732, 4738, 4742, 4746, 4750, and 4754). The duplicates are hereby terminated, with the caveat that the Firms shall promptly notify the Court if any of those filings are actually separate and different from the initial Motion to Withdraw. To evaluate counsel's reasons for moving to withdraw, the Firms shall, within one week of this Order, file a supplemental declaration including the relevant language from the Firms' retainer agreements and explaining how the claims of Plaintiffs listed in Exhibit A are beyond the scope of that language. (If necessary or appropriate, the Firms may seek leave to file those documents under seal.) Any opposition to the Firms' Motion by Plaintiffs themselves, New GM, or otherwise shall be filed no later than two weeks from the date of this Order. The Firms' reply, if any, shall be filed no later than one week thereafter. The Firms are directed to serve a copy of this Order on the Plaintiffs listed in Exhibit A of their Motion and to docket proof of such service no later than October 26, 2017. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543 Docket Nos. 4716, 4720, 4724, 4728, 4732, 4738, 4742, 4746, 4750, and 4754. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/19/2017) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
October 16, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 166 ORDER NO. 136 [Regarding the October 4, 2017 Status Conference]: A Status Conference will be held on Monday, December 4, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. EST in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the parties should meet and confer regarding next steps for the personal injury cases in the MDL, and should submit a joint letter detailing the parties' position(s) by Monday, November 27, 2017, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/16/2017) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
October 3, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 165 ORDER: In the Opinion and Order regarding New GM's Partial Motion To Dismiss the Fourth Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint, entered on June 30, 2017 (Docket No. 4175), the language on page 39, line 20 that reads "To state a claim for fraudulent inducement under Illinois law is hereby REVISED to read: To state a claim for fraudulent concealment under Illinois law." (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/3/2017) As Per Chambers Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
September 28, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 164 ORDER: On September 26, 2017, the Court issued Order No. 135 establishing the terms and conditions of Layn R. Phillips' appointment as economic loss mediator in this matter. (Docket No. 4638). The Court inadvertently failed to attach Exhibit A, the normal and customary hourly rates of Mr. Phillips and personnel working under his direction. The Court hereby issues this Order with Exhibit A for Order No. 135 attached. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 9/28/2017) As Per Chambers, Filed In Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
September 26, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 163 ORDER NO. 135 [Regarding the Terms and Conditions of the Appointment of the Economic Loss Mediator]: Order No. 132 appointed Layn R. Phillips of Phillips ADR as the economic loss mediator in this matter. (Docket No. 4525). Mr. Phillips has confirmed that he is able and willing to serve as the mediator in this matter and that he is available to begin meeting with the parties in a timely fashion. The Court further ordered the parties to submit an agreed upon proposed order of appointment that sets forth the terms and conditions of the mediator's appointment. (Id. at 1-2). Based on the joint submission, the Court hereby orders that: Mr. Phillips' authority is limited to facilitating settlement discussions for the economic loss actions...Any disputes regarding compensation, costs and expenses, or the allocation of payment of such fees and costs among the parties, shall be brought to the Court's attention, but only after the parties have conferred in good faith to resolve or narrow the dispute. The Court thanks Mr. Phillips in advance for his service to the parties and the Court, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 9/26/2017) As Per Chambers Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
September 26, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 162 ORDER NO. 134 [Regarding Amended Schedule for New GM's Phase Two Bellwether Plan Category C Replacement Case Selections]: Upon review of the parties' joint letter dated September 20, 2017, and for good cause shown, the Court adopts a revised schedule for New GM's New Replacement Discovery Pool Category C Replacement Case selections as follows. Fact discovery in the New GM Discovery Pool Category C Replacement Cases will conclude no later than Friday, December 1, 2017. By 5:00 p.m. EST on Friday, December 1, 2017, Lead Counsel will exercise one strike against a New GM Discovery Pool Category C Replacement Case...Lead Counsel shall present their expert witnesses for deposition on or before Tuesday, February 13, 2018...New GM shall present its expert witnesses for deposition on or before Thursday, March 29, 2018...Expert discovery for the Phase Two Category C Replacement Case Trial Candidate shall conclude by Thursday, March 29, 2018. By Friday, February 26, 2018, the parties will meet and confer and submit a joint proposed order regarding deadlines for submitting any Daubert motions, dispositive motions, and motions in limine for Bellwether Trial No. 11. The New GM Phase Two Category C Replacement Case Trial Candidate shall be scheduled as MDL Bellwether Trial No. 11 from June 18, 2018-July 9, 2018. To the extent not modified herein, all deadlines in Order Nos. 107, 118, 121, and 128 (and any other previous order modifying Order Nos. 107 and 118) remain in full force and effect, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 9/25/2017) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
September 20, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 161 STIPULATION OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSALS PURSUANT TO F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii): COMES NOW, Economic Loss Plaintiffs Kimberly Smith, David McMaster, Bryan Mettee, Carter Bishop, Gwendolyn Grooms, Michelle Washington, Cindy Wilson, and Scott Schultz, under F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby give notice that their claims are voluntarily dismissed with prejudice. General Motors LLC stipulates to these dismissals with prejudice. COMES NOW, Economic Loss Plaintiff Randall Pina hereby gives notice, under F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that his claims are voluntarily dismissed without prejudice. Lead Counsel represent that Mr. Pina's health issues, as set forth in the doctor's note attached as Exhibit A, prevent him from sitting for a deposition or otherwise participating as a named plaintiff in this litigation. General Motors LLC stipulates to this dismissal without prejudice. SO ORDERED. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Kimberly Smith, David McMaster, Bryan Mettee, Carter Bishop, Gwendolyn Grooms, Randall Pina, Michelle Washington, Cindy Wilson, and Scott Schultz as Plaintiffs in this case. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 9/20/2017) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
September 14, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 160 ORDER NO. 133 [Regarding Motions To Seal]: To minimize the burdens on the Court and the parties, the procedures regarding the filing of documents under seal or in redacted form set forth in Section X of MDL Order No. 77 (Docket No. 1349) are hereby modified as follows. Effective immediately, unless and until the Court orders otherwise (as to any specific submission or more generally), the parties are granted leave to file any and all motion papers under seal or in redacted form on a temporary basis, without the need to obtain specific approval from the Court to do so. That is, the parties need not (and should not) file a motion to file under seal or in redacted form any papers filed in connection with another motion. (The parties should continue to file motions to file under seal or in redacted form any documents that are not related to another motion.) In lieu of filing a motion to seal motion papers, the parties should file a "Notice of Sealed/Redacted Filing" on the docket at the time of filing any sealed or redacted materials. Upon resolution of the underlying motion by the Court, the parties shall then follow the procedures set forth in Section X of MDL Order No. 77 with respect to addressing the propriety of keeping the documents at issue under seal or in redacted form on a permanent basis. On that score, the Court reminds the parties that sealing and/or redactions must be narrowly tailored to serve whatever purpose justifies them and otherwise consistent with the presumption in favor of public access to judicial documents. See, e.g., Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006). Additionally, "the mere fact that information is subject to a confidentiality agreement between litigants is not a valid basis to overcome the presumption in favor of public access to judicial documents." In re: Gen. Motors LLC, No. 14-MD-2543 (JMF), 2015 WL 7574460, at *10 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 25, 2015) (citing cases). (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 9/14/2017) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
September 11, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 159 ORDER NO. 132 [Regarding Selection of a Mediator for the Economic Loss Class Actions]: Upon review of the parties' selections, the Court hereby selects Layn R. Phillips of Phillips ADR. Counsel shall promptly contact Mr. Phillips to negotiate a fee arrangement, confirm that he is able and willing to serve as the mediator in this matter (including but not limited to confirming that he does not have any conflicts that would preclude his service), and that he is available to begin meeting with the parties in a timely fashion (ideally, in the next month or two at the latest), and shall advise the Court by joint letter no later than September 25, 2017, in the event that a new selection must be made. By that same date, the parties shall also submit an agreed upon proposed Order of appointment (or competing proposed orders with appropriate letter briefing) that sets forth the terms and conditions of the mediator's appointment, as appropriate, presumably including but not limited to the scope of the mediator's authority; the payment of fees and costs; the confidentiality and preservation of communications; the propriety and terms of ex parte communication with the parties; and the propriety and terms of communication (ex parte or otherwise) with the Court. (With respect to the issue of communications with the Court, the Court reserves judgment pending the parties' proposed Order, but is inclined to believe that the mediator should be permitted to communicate confidential information to the Court, to be filed under seal, with the agreement of counsel for both sides and should otherwise be permitted to communicate with the Court regarding non-confidential matters, including procedural issues and updates on the progress of settlement communications.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 9/11/2017) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
August 30, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 158 ORDER NO. 131 [Regarding Amended Schedule for Motion Practice, Discovery, and Bellwether Procedures Related to and Proposed Amendment of the Fourth Amended Consolidated Complaint]: The Court, having received and reviewed the parties' letter briefs (Docket Nos. 4459, 4460), hereby amends Order No. 114 as follows. Consistent with the Court's comments at the August 11, 2017 Status Conference, plaintiffs shall file their motion for leave to amend the FACC to add additional plaintiffs by Friday, September 8, 2017. New GM shall file its opposition brief by Friday, October 6, 2017. Plaintiffs shall file their reply brief by Friday, October 20, 2017. Plaintiffs' proposed new named plaintiffs must submit substantially complete Plaintiff Fact Sheets, declarations, authorizations (where applicable), and requested documents by no later than Friday, September 29, 2017. Bellwether State Selection Process: No later than Thursday, September 7, 2017, New GM shall file a letter indicating whether it selects New York or Texas as the third Bellwether State. Motion for Summary Judgment on Benefit of the Bargain in the Sixteen FACC Motion Practice Jurisdictions: By Friday, October 6, 2017, New GM shall file a motion for summary judgment. Plaintiffs' opposition must be filed by Thursday, November 2, 2017. New GM's reply must be filed by Friday, November 10, 2017. Fact discovery contemplated under Order No. 84 and Order No. 114 for the plaintiffs' claims in the Bellwether States shall be completed by no later than Friday, December 15, 2017. Discovery related to FACC plaintiffs and FACC plaintiffs' claims outside of the Bellwether States shall be stayed until further order of the Court (except as required by Paragraph 1 above). By no later than Friday, November 10, 2017, Lead Counsel shall disclose any experts (including, but not limited to class and merits experts) and serve expert reports related to the plaintiffs' claims in the Bellwether States. By Friday, December 22, 2017, New GM shall depose plaintiffs' experts. By Friday, February 2, 2018, New GM shall disclose any experts (including, but not limited to class and merits experts) and serve expert reports. By Friday, March 2, 2018, Lead Counsel shall disclose any experts and reports limited strictly to rebuttal of New GM's experts. By Friday, March 16, 2018, plaintiffs shall depose New GM's experts, New GM shall depose plaintiffs' rebuttal experts, and expert discovery shall be completed. Bellwether State Summary Judgment Motion Practice: New GM shall file any motion for summary judgment by Tuesday, April 3, 2018. Plaintiffs shall file their opposition by Tuesday, May 15, 2018. New GM shall file its reply by Tuesday, June 12, 2018. Bellwether State Class Certification Motion Practice: Plaintiffs shall file any motion for class certification by Tuesday, April 3, 2018. New GM shall file its opposition by Tuesday, May 15, 2018. Plaintiffs shall file their reply by Tuesday, June 12, 2018. The Court will hold a hearing on the summary judgment and class certification motion practice contemplated herein in September 2018 or as soon thereafter as is reasonably practical. To the extent not expressly modified herein, all deadlines in Order No. 114 (and any other previous order modifying Order No. 114) remain in full force and effect, and as further set forth herein. (Deposition due by 3/16/2018. Expert Discovery due by 3/16/2018. Fact Discovery due by 12/15/2017. Motions due by 4/3/2018. Responses due by 5/15/2018. Replies due by 6/12/2018.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/30/2017) As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras) Modified on 8/30/2017 (ras).
August 22, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 157 ORDER NO. 130 [Regarding the August 11, 2017 Status Conference]: A Status Conference will be held Wednesday, October 4, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. EDT in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. Unless and until the Court orders otherwise, the parties should continue their coordination efforts in Related Actions pursuant to Order No. 15 (Docket No. 315) and keep the Court apprised of emerging coordination issues through their joint letter updates (see Order No. 8 V, Docket No. 249) or in separate letter updates, as circumstances require. Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, including the Court's decision to adopt an economic loss bellwether procedure, by Friday, August 25, 2017, the parties should submit a joint proposal or competing proposals addressing, among the other issues discussed at the Status Conference: (1) the timing and briefing schedule for plaintiffs' proposed motion for leave to amend the Fourth Amended Consolidated Complaint...Additionally, per the parties' agreement (Docket Nos. 4337-4338), the parties should meet and confer regarding application of the Court's prior motion to dismiss opinions to the remaining 35 states and submit an agreed plan (or competing plans) with respect to resolving any differences in the parties' positions by no later than December 15, 2017. Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the trial date for Bellwether Trial No. 11 has been continued to Monday, June 18, 2017. The parties should review the current pretrial schedule, meet and confer and propose any modifications as appropriate. Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the parties should meet and confer and submit a joint or competing proposals regarding a mediator for the economic loss claims by no later than Monday, August 21, 2017, and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/21/2017) As Per Chambers Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras) Modified on 8/22/2017 (ras). Modified on 8/31/2017 (ras).
August 9, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 156 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER [Regarding Plaintiffs' Motion for Reconsideration and/or Clarification of the Court's Order Dismissing the Claims of "Pre-Recall Plaintiffs"]: re: (4256 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION for Reconsideration re; (4175) Memorandum & Opinion, Plaintiffs' Motion for Reconsideration and/or Clarification of Court's Order Dismissing Certain Damages Claims of Plaintiffs Who Purchased After the Sale Order filed by GM Ignition Switch MDL Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration is GRANTED, and the Court's prior Opinion and Order is modified as reflected here. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 4256, and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/9/2017) ***As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
August 3, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 155 OPINION AND ORDER [Regarding New GM's Partial Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs' Successor Liability Claims in the Fourth Amended Consolidated Complaint]: re: (3519 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION for Summary Judgment on Successor Liability, filed by General Motors LLC. The Court grants New GM's motion for summary judgment with respect to Plaintiffs' successor liability claims in part and reserves judgment on the remainder of the motion. Specifically, the Court holds that: Plaintiffs' claims are not barred by the Second Circuit's decision in Tronox because, by virtue of the due process violation, Plaintiffs did not know about, and could not bring, the claims at the time of the bankruptcy; Each jurisdiction's choice-of-law rules must be applied to determine the substantive law that governs the merits of Plaintiffs' successor liability claims in that jurisdiction; Based on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction analysis, Delaware law applies to Plaintiffs' successor liability claims in seven jurisdictions considered here: California, the District of Columbia, Florida, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New York, and Wisconsin. The applicable law to be applied in the other nine jurisdictions is as follows: (See document); Under Delaware law, Plaintiffs' successor liability claims fail as a matter of law, requiring dismissal of those claims in seven of the sixteen states; and Additional briefing is warranted on the merits of Plaintiffs' claims in the other nine jurisdictions due to, among other things, the potential settlement between Plaintiffs and the GUC Trust. Accordingly, the successor liability claims of Plaintiffs from California, the District of Columbia, Florida, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New York, and Wisconsin are dismissed, and the Court reserves judgment on the successor liability claims of Plaintiffs from Alabama, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Virginia. With respect to those nine jurisdictions, the parties shall, no later than August 24, 2017, file supplemental memoranda of law, not to exceed twenty-five pages in length, addressing the merits (including any effect of the settlement negotiations or potential settlement between Plaintiffs and the GUC Trust, as to which the parties should submit supporting declarations as appropriate). The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 3519, and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/3/2017) ***As Per Chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
August 1, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 154 ORDER NO. 129 [Regarding Submission of Electronic Courtesy Copies of Certain Motion Papers]: Effective immediately, with respect to (1) substantive motions for all bellwether trials (including, but not limited to, Daubert motions, summary judgment motions, OSI briefing, and motions in limine); and (2) substantial motions relating to the MDL as a whole, the economic loss class action claims, or any member case (including, but not limited to, motions to dismiss, motions for summary judgment, motions for class certification, and motions to remand), the parties shall adhere to the following procedures for the submission of electronic courtesy copies (which are to be filed in addition to, rather than in place of, paper courtesy copies). (See document). The Court's Individual Rules and Practices and all prior Orders continue to apply to the MDL and all member cases, except as modified herein. For avoidance of doubt, the parties are still required to follow the procedures set forth in MDL Order No. 77 at the time any motion to seal or motion to redact is filed. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/1/2017) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
July 19, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 153 ORDER NO. 128 [Regarding New GM's Phase Two Bellwether Plan Category C Replacement Case Selections]: Upon review of the parties' joint letter dated July 17, 2017, and for good cause shown, the Court adopts a revised schedule for New GM's New Replacement Discovery Pool Category C Replacement Case selections as follows. By Monday, July 24, 2017, New GM shall select two cases that satisfy the Category C criteria ("Discovery Pool Category C Replacement Cases"). Fact discovery in the New GM Discovery Pool Category C Replacement Cases will commence on Monday, July 24, 2017 and will conclude no later than Friday, November 3, 2017. By 5:00 p.m. EDT on Friday, November 3, 2017, Lead Counsel will exercise one strike against a New GM Discovery Pool Category C Replacement Case. The remaining case will constitute the New GM Phase Two Category C Replacement Case Early Trial Candidate for Bellwether Trial No. 11 and will proceed to case-specific expert discovery as follows: Lead Counsel shall disclose expert witnesses and submit any reports required under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) on or before Monday, December 11, 2017. Lead Counsel shall present their expert witnesses for deposition on or before Friday, January 12, 2018. New GM shall disclose expert witnesses and submit any reports required under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) on or before Friday, January 19, 2018. New GM shall present its expert witnesses for deposition on or before Friday, February 12, 2018. Absent good cause, no rebuttal expert reports shall be permitted. Expert discovery for the Phase Two Category C Replacement Case Trial Candidate shall conclude by Friday, February 12, 2018. By Friday, January 26, 2018, the parties will meet and confer and submit a joint proposed order regarding deadlines for submitting any Daubert motions, dispositive motions, and motions in limine for Bellwether Trial No. 11. The New GM Phase Two Category C Replacement Case Trial Candidate shall be scheduled as MDL Bellwether Trial No. 11 from May 7, 2018-May 25, 2018. (Trial will not be held on May 21, 2018, as it is a Jewish holiday.) To the extent not modified herein, all deadlines in Order Nos. 107, 118, and 121 (and any other previous order modifying Order Nos. 107 and 118) remain in full force and effect, and as further set forth herein. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/18/2017) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras) Modified on 7/21/2017 (ras).
July 12, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 152 ORDER NO. 127 [Regarding the July 6, 2017 Status Conference]: A Status Conference will be held Tuesday, August 8, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. EDT in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. The parties should continue their coordination efforts in Related Actions pursuant to Order No. 15 (Docket No. 315) and keep the Court apprised of emerging coordination issues through their joint letter updates (see Order No. 8 V, Docket No. 249) or in separate letter updates, as circumstances require. Consistent with the Court's comments on the record at the Status Conference, by Thursday, July 13, 2017, the parties should submit a joint letter setting forth their positions with respect to whether additional briefing on New GM's motion for summary judgment on successor liability claims (Docket No. 3519) would be appropriate in light of any potential settlement of the plaintiffs' Late Claims Motion in the Bankruptcy Court. Additionally, consistent with Order No. 114 Section II (Docket No. 3431) and the Court's comments at the Status Conference, by no later than Friday, July 21, 2017, the parties should submit competing letter briefs (not to exceed ten single-spaced pages) with respect to the effect of (and how to proceed in light of) the Court's Opinion and Order Regarding New GM's Partial Motion To Dismiss the Fourth Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint ("FACC") (Docket No. 4175). Consistent with the Court's comments on the record at the Status Conference, Order No. 123 Paragraph 1 (Docket No. 3902) is hereby modified such that the Dodson trial will commence on Thursday, November 2, 2017. All pretrial deadlines set forth in Order No. 123 remain in effect unless and until the Court orders otherwise. Consistent with the Court's comments on the record at the Status Conference, wherein the Court granted New GM's request for a replacement Category C Bellwether Trial Candidate (Docket No. 4166), the parties shall submit an agreed-upon proposed order by Thursday, July 13, 2017 regarding case selection, discovery, and other pretrial deadlines for the additional Category C cases. Consistent with the Court's comments on the record at the Status Conference, the parties will keep the Court apprised of developments regarding settlement. To that end, New GM should include in the parties' monthly related case update letters a report on the status of settlement similar to New GM's February 24, 2017 report. (See Docket No. 3726.) (And as further set forth in this order.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/12/2017) As per instructions from chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras) Modified on 7/13/2017 (ras).
July 12, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 151 ORDER NO. 126 - Regarding Common Benefit Order Fund Disbursement: IT IS ORDERED that the Common Benefit Order Funds shall be disbursed in the amounts set forth within. The Court will file and maintain the billing records submitted in connection with the present motion under seal. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 4186. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/12/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ab)
June 30, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 150 OPINION AND ORDER [Regarding New GM's Partial Motion To Dismiss the Fourth Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint] re: (3577 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION to Dismiss Claims of Certain Plaintiffs in the Fourth Amended Consolidated Complaint, filed by General Motors LLC. For the reasons stated below, New GM's motion to dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. More specifically, it is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiffs' repleaded "brand devaluation" claims, but DENIED with respect to Plaintiff's lost-time-to repair claims. Additionally, it is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiffs who purchased their vehicles prior to New GM's inception or disposed of their vehicles prior to the recall announcement. And finally, New GM's motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' claims in Alabama, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wisconsin is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, depending on, among other things, whether each state's law allows claims in the absence of a manifested defect, requires a special trust relationship between the parties for a duty to disclose to arise, and permits plaintiffs to plead both contract claims and unjust enrichment claims. Ultimately, for the reasons that follow, most of Plaintiffs' consumer fraud, fraudulent concealment, and breach of implied warranty claims survive, while the bulk of Plaintiffs' unjust enrichment claims must be and are dismissed. As the Court indicated in the last round of motion practice, although this ruling addresses only some of the claims in the operative complaint, it should inform the parties with respect to the viability of other claims and, more generally, bear upon the further progress of the MDL. Pursuant to Order No. 114 (Docket No. 3431), no later than three weeks from the date of this Opinion and Order, the parties shall meet and confer and advise the Court of their views with respect to whether and how the Court's rulings apply to the thirty-five jurisdictions that have not been the subject of full briefing (the Court's sincere hope being that it will not have to repeat this exercise with respect to each and every one of the remaining jurisdictions). Any submissions should address a briefing schedule and process if either side believes that briefing or motion practice is appropriate. Further, to the extent the parties find it helpful, they should confer and submit a chart (or proposed order) summarizing the rulings in this Opinion and Order with respect to the named Plaintiffs' claims, to be so ordered by the Court. In those submissions, Plaintiffs should also indicate to the Court whether they intend to amend the FACC (as to any of the claims that were dismissed with leave to amend) and, if so, provide an outline of the proposed amendments and a proposed schedule. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 3577, and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/30/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
June 30, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 149 ORDER FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE granting (4161) Motion for Lauren Akers to Appear Pro Hac Vice in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF; granting (367) Motion for Lauren Akers to Appear Pro Hac Vice in case 1:14-cv-08317-JMF. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Applicant is admitted to practice Pro Hac Vice in the above captioned case in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543, Docket No. 4161, and 14-CV-8317, Docket No. 367. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/29/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
June 16, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 148 ORDER OF DISMISSAL: The claims of Plaintiffs on Exhibit 1 are hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. See In re World Trade Ctr. Disaster Site Litig., 722 F.3d at 487 (holding "that the court did not exceed the bounds of its discretion in dismissing the noncompliant plaintiffs' complaints"). The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Plaintiffs on Exhibit 1 as Plaintiffs in this action and to terminate 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 4029, and as further set forth herein. Melissa Cave (individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated) terminated. Motions terminated: (4029 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs for Failure to Comply with Order No. 45, filed by General Motors LLC. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/15/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras) Modified on 6/19/2017 (ras).
May 24, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 147 SCHEDULING ORDER: Upon reflection, to accommodate counsel who wish to listen to the MDL status conference through Court Call, the Court will conduct the MDL status conference first on July 6, 2017, beginning at 9:30 a.m., and then proceed to the final pretrial conference in Ward v. General Motors immediately after conclusion of the MDL status conference. SO ORDERED Status Conference set for 7/6/2017 at 09:30 AM before Judge Jesse M. Furman. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/24/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ama)
May 24, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 146 SCHEDULING ORDER: By previous Order, the Court scheduled the final pretrial conference and completion of the written jury questionnaires in Ward v. General Motors, 14-CV-8317, for June 29, 2017, at 9:00 a.m. (14-MD-2543, Order No. 120). Jury questionnaires will still be completed by prospective jurors on June 29, 2017, but the final pretrial conference is RESCHEDULED to July 6, 2017, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. In addition, the next MDL status conference will take place on July 6, 2017, immediately following the final pretrial conference for Ward. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/23/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
May 4, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 145 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: New GM's Motion in Limine 32, which seeks an across-the-board ruling categorically excluding certain evidence relating to Cobalt Vehicles, is DENIED. That denial, however, is without prejudice to renewal by New GM when the record is fully developed and without prejudice to New GM's objection, pursuant to the MDL's standard procedures, to specific evidence that a plaintiff seeks to offer from the evidence at issue here. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543, Docket No. 3738, and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/4/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ras)
April 25, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 144 ORDER granting (3904) Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. The April 27, 2017 status conference is CANCELLED. The Court will issue an order in due course with respect to a new conference date. (HEREBY ORDERED by Judge Jesse M. Furman)(Text Only Order) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (Furman, Jesse)
March 24, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 143 SCHEDULING ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the status conference in this matter, previously scheduled for March 31, 2017, at 9:30 a.m., is RESCHEDULED to April 27, 2017, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. Counsel shall promptly update the MDL website accordingly. The Clerk of Court is directed to docket this order in 14-MD-2543, 14-MC-2543, and all member cases. Status Conference set for 4/27/2017 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/24/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(kgo)
February 21, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 142 ORDER: On February 16, 2017, Defendants Stoneridge, Inc. and Stoneridge, Inc. d/b/a Pollack Engineered Products filed a response to a subpoena issued by Plaintiffs. Per this Court's Local Rules, discovery-related correspondence is not to be filed with the Court, see S.D.N.Y. Local Civil Rules 5.1 and 37.2, so the submission will be disregarded. The Clerk of Court is directed to docket this Order in 14-MD-2543 and all member cases. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/21/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(kgo)
February 16, 2017 Filing 141 RESPONSE to Discovery Request from Stoneridge.Document filed by Stoneridge, Inc..Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Ward, Ashley)
February 3, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 140 COMMON BENEFIT ORDER FUND DISBURSEMENT ORDER granting (3640) Motion for Disbursement of Funds in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. WHEREAS, Plaintiffs seek reimbursement of one hundred percent (100%) of the assessment payments that have been by made Executive Committee members and by Liaison Counsel, and seventy-five percent (75%) of the assessment payments that have been made by Co-Lead Counsel; WHEREAS, there are sufficient funds for these reimbursements in the Common Benefit Order Fund, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the Common Benefit Order Funds shall be disbursed in the amounts as forth herein. Co-Lead Counsel shall retain in their possession the documents submitted in support of the motion in case there is a need for further review in the future. Counsel are reminded that they must adhere to the terms of Order No. 13 (Docket No. 304), including the limitations on travel and the like. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 3640. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/3/2017) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (mro) Modified on 2/3/2017 (mro).
January 17, 2017 Per chambers Berenice Summerville has been terminated. (sjo)
December 2, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 139 ORDER NO. 119 [Regarding Absent Class Member Discovery Related to Fourth Amended Consolidated Complaint]: The Court, having received and reviewed the parties' competing positions set forth in their November 16, 2016 and December 1, 2016 joint letters (Docket No. 3533, 3563), HEREBY ORDERS, ADJUDGES, and DECREES that Phase Three discovery of absent putative class members (members of the alleged classes that have not been named in the Fourth Amended Consolidated Complaint ("FACC")) shall proceed as set forth in this Order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/2/2016) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al., as per Chambers. (mro)
November 28, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 138 ORDER NO. 118 [Regarding the Amended Phase Two Bellwether Plan for Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases]: Order No. 107 set forth the schedule for the Phase Two Bellwether Plan for Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases based on claims arising out of alleged defects in vehicles manufactured by General Motors LLC ("New GM") or General Motors Corporation ("Old GM"). The Phase Two Bellwether Plan covers three categories of claims involving accidents occurring on or after July 11, 2009. (See Order No. 107, Docket No. 3081.) Dispositive motions for the Initial Limited Case Pool shall be filed on or before Friday, February 17, 2017. Dispositive motions shall be limited to the following issue: Does a disputed issue of material fact exist over whether an alleged inadvertent ignition switch rotation occurred in an accident where the air bags deployed during the accident? Oppositions to dispositive motions shall be filed on or before Monday, March 20, 2017. Any replies shall be filed on or before Monday, April 3, 2017. By Monday, January 9, 2017, Lead Counsel and counsel for New GM shall each submit letter briefs proposing the sequence of trials for MDL Bellwether Trials 7-9 and setting forth the parties' supporting rationales for their proposed sequences. The Court will then designate the sequence for trying these three Phase Two Early Trial Cases. Fact discovery and expert discovery for Lead Counsel's Discovery Pool Category C Replacement Cases shall proceed on a different schedule from New GM's Category C Discovery Pool Case selections. Fact discovery in the Discovery Pool Category C Replacement Cases will conclude no later than Friday, March 17, 2017. By 5:00 p.m. EDT on Monday, March 20, 2017, New GM will exercise one strike against a Discovery Pool Category C Replacement Case selected by Lead Counsel. The remaining case will constitute the Phase Two Category C Replacement Case Early Trial Candidate and will proceed to case-specific expert discovery as follows: (a) Lead Counsel shall disclose expert witnesses and submit any reports required under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) on or before Wednesday, April 26, 2017. (b) Lead Counsel shall present their expert witnesses for deposition on or before Friday, May 26, 2017. (c) New GM shall disclose expert witnesses and submit any reports required under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) on or before Friday, June 2, 2017. (d) New GM shall present its expert witnesses for deposition on or before Monday, July 6, 2017. (e) Absent good cause, no rebuttal expert reports shall be permitted. (f) Expert discovery for the Phase Two Category C Replacement Case Trial Candidate shall conclude by Monday, July 6, 2017. The Phase Two Category C Replacement Case Trial Candidate shall be scheduled as MDL Bellwether Trial No. 10 from January 15, 2018-February 2, 2018 as set forth in Order No. 107 paragraph 13. To the extent not modified herein, all deadlines in Order No. 107 (and any other previous order modifying Order No. 107) remain in full force and effect. (As further set forth in this Order.) ( Brief due by 1/9/2017., Deposition due by 7/6/2017., Expert Discovery due by 7/6/2017., Fact Discovery due by 3/17/2017., Motions due by 2/17/2017., Responses due by 3/20/2017, Replies due by 4/3/2017.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 11/28/2016) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(mro) Modified on 1/4/2017 (mro).
November 9, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 137 ORDER NO 116 - Regarding the Agenda for the November 10, 2016 Status Conference: In addition to the agenda items set forth in the Court's November 7, 2016 Memo Endorsement, (Docket No. 3497), counsel should confer, as appropriate, with respect the following issues and/or questions and be prepared to address them at the November 10, 2016 Status Conference: (1) the status of the settlements between New GM and clients of Hilliard Munoz Gonzalez LLP and Thomas J. Henry Injury Attorneys (see Docket No. 1854), and any upcoming deadlines; (2) whether the Court should set a deadline for remand of any remaining cases falling within the scope of the Phase One Bellwether Plan and, if so, what the deadline should be and what procedures should govern remands; and (3) communications with, and discovery from, absent class members. As the Court will explain, it is inclined to allow New GM to pursue discovery from absent class members, but to limit and structure such discovery, either by capping the number of absent class members from whom New GM can take discovery or through some sort of statistical sampling. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 11/9/2016) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ab)
November 4, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 136 SCHEDULING ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the status conference in this matter, previously scheduled for November 10, 2016, at 3:30 p.m., is RESCHEDULED to for the same day at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. Counsel shall promptly update the MDL website accordingly. The Clerk of Court is directed to docket this order in 14-MD-2543, 14-MC-2543, and all member cases. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 11/4/2016) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ab)
October 20, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 135 ORDER NO. 115: The Court, having held a Status Conference on October 13, 2016, and having given counsel an opportunity to be heard on the agenda items set forth in the Court's October 11, 2016 Memo Endorsement (Docket No. 3420), issues this Order to memorialize the actions taken and rulings made at the Status Conference. The Status Conference previously scheduled for November 9, 2016 has been rescheduled to Thursday, November 10, 2016 at 3:30 p.m. EST. In addition, a Status Conference will be held Wednesday, December 14, 2016 at 9:30 a.m. EST. Both Status Conferences shall be held in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. Consistent with the Court's comments on the record at the Status Conference, the parties shall meet and confer regarding the discovery issues raised in the Status Conference agenda letter (Docket No. 3416), and, no later than Tuesday, October 18, 2016, submit a joint letter advising the Court of those issues they have been able to resolve and those that remain in dispute. Per the Court's Order of October 19, 2016, granting an extension, no later than Wednesday, October 26, 2016, the parties shall submit competing letter briefs (not to exceed five single-spaced pages) regarding any unresolved issues. (As further set forth in this Order) (Status Conference set for 12/14/2016 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/20/2016) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(kl)
October 13, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 134 ORDER NO. 113: The Court, having received and reviewed the parties' joint proposed order, HEREBY ORDERS, ADJUDGES, AND DECREES that motion practice concerning the successor liability claims in the Fourth Amended Consolidated Complaint ("FACC"), shall proceed as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/13/2016) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(lmb)
October 12, 2016 Filing 133 NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS by Domenick Giovanni Lazzara on behalf of Nephthys Proctor. New Address: Lee & Lazzara, PLLC, 3804 W. North B Street, Tampa, FL, United States 33609, 8136064533. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Lazzara, Domenick)
September 19, 2016 Set/Reset Deadlines: Brief due by 10/6/2016. Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
September 19, 2016 Set/Reset Hearings: Status Conference set for 10/13/2016 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 11/9/2016 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
September 19, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 132 ORDER NO. 112 [Regarding the September 7, 2016 Status Conference] denying without prejudice (193) Motion to Dismiss in case 1:14-cv-08385-JMF: In addition to the Status Conference previously scheduled for Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. EDT (see Order No. 111 I (Docket No. 3178)), a Status Conference will be held on Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 9:30 a.m. EST in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. The parties should continue to keep the Court apprised of proceedings in the Supreme Court, Second Circuit, and the Bankruptcy Court that may be related to the MDL Proceeding. Plaintiffs were granted an extension until Thursday, September 15, 2016 to file the Fourth Amended Consolidated Complaint ("FACC"). The deadline set forth in Order No. 111 for the parties to file joint or competing letter briefs regarding issues related to the FACC by Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 12:00 p.m. EDT remains in effect. The Boyd plaintiff's motion to dismiss is denied without prejudice. The parties should meet and confer immediately regarding the issues raised by Lead Counsel at the Status Conference, including any jurisdictional concerns, and raise any unresolved issues promptly, and as further set forth in this order. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-CV-8385, Docket No. 193. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 9/19/2016) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn)
August 11, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 131 ORDER granting (3204) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to submit the parties' disputes regarding plaintiffs proposed Valukas Report excerpts and the parties competing proposed jury submissions in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. (HEREBY ORDERED by Judge Jesse M. Furman)(Text Only Order) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (Furman, Jesse) Modified on 8/16/2016 (ab).
August 2, 2016 Mailed a copy of (20 in 1:16-cv-03923-JMF, 3162 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) Order, to Marjorie A. Creamer 705 S. Monroe St. Smith Center, KS 66967. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ca)
July 29, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 130 ORDER NO. 110: Upon consideration of the parties' agreed-upon proposed order, with the modifications discussed at the July 28, 2016 status conference, and for good cause shown, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. Any plaintiff who fails to comply with his or her obligations under Order No. 108 may be subject to having his or her claims dismissed. For plaintiffs whose claims were pending in MDL 2543 as of July 13, 2016, plaintiffs must comply with Order No. 108 within 90 days of the entry of Order No. 108. For plaintiffs whose claims are subsequently transferred and/or consolidated to MDL 2543, plaintiffs must comply with Order No. 108 within 90 days of his or her claims being transferred to and/or consolidated in MDL 2543. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/28/2016) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al, per Chambers. (kko)
July 15, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 129 OPINION AND ORDER [Regarding New GM's Partial Motion To Dismiss the Third Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint] re: (2356 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION to Dismiss Claims of Certain Plaintiffs in the Third Amended Consolidated Complaint filed by General Motors LLC: In short, many of the claims of the named Plaintiffs in this motion survive, but a large swath of the claims in the TACC - those brought under RICO, those brought on behalf of Plaintiffs whose cars were not allegedly defective when sold, and those brought on behalf of Plaintiffs whose cars are too dissimilar from the named Plaintiffs' cars - are foreclosed. (For convenience, a chart indicating whether New GM's motion is granted or denied with respect to each state law claim is attached as Exhibit A.) Additionally, the Court rejects Plaintiffs' broadest theory of damages - the brand devaluation theory as unprecedented and unsound. Thus, to the extent that Plaintiffs are entitled to relief at all, they are entitled - at most - to benefit-of-the-bargain defect damages, out-of-pocket damages, and the like. Although this ruling addresses only some of the claims in the TACC, it will undoubtedly inform the parties with respect to the viability of other claims and, more generally, bear upon the further progress of the MDL. The July 13, 2016 ruling from the Second Circuit, which held that purchasers of Old GM cars with ignition switch defects can bring claims for Old GM's wrongdoing against New GM has, in all likelihood, also substantially redefined the scope of the claims that may proceed. The parties should be prepared to discuss the implications of this Court's ruling and the Second Circuit's ruling at the July 28, 2016 status conference - including but not limited to implications for the next phase of discovery. (See Docket Nos. 1569, 2156). Additionally, within thirty days from the date of this Opinion and Order, Plaintiffs shall submit their proposed amendments to the TACC. (See Docket No. 2323). The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 2356. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/15/2016) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
July 13, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 128 ORDER NO. 108 in case 2:14-cv-02458-JMF; terminating (2903) Motion for Seeking Documentation from Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Plaintiffs in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. Upon consideration of New GM's motion (see Docket No. 2903), submissions by Lead Counsel and New GM, and discussion on the record at the June 17, 2016 MDL 2543 status conference, and for good cause shown, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. Each Plaintiff in MDL 2543 asserting claims for a Subject Incident that occurred on or after July 10, 2009 is hereby ordered to produce the following documentation: Drivers License of the Claimant. (As further set forth in this Order.) Counsel for New GM is directed to serve a copy of this Order on all pro se Plaintiffs in the MDL. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 2903. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/13/2016) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al., as per Chambers. (kko)
June 23, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 127 ORDER NO. 106 [Regarding the June 17, 2016 Status Conference]: The Court, having held a Status Conference on June 17, 2016, and having given counsel an opportunity to be heard on the agenda items set forth in the Court's June 16, 2016 Memo Endorsement (Docket No. 3005), issues this Order to memorialize the actions taken and rulings made at the Status Conference. The parties should continue their coordination efforts in Related Actions pursuant to Order No. 15 (Docket No. 315) and keep the Court apprised of emerging coordination issues through their joint letter updates (see Order No. 8 V, Docket No. 249) or in separate letter updates, as circumstances require. Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the parties shall meet and confer and submit a joint proposed order regarding the selection of additional bellwether trial cases and related discovery by no later than Friday, July 1, 2016. Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the parties shall meet and confer and submit a joint proposed order-or, if the parties are unable to reach agreement, competing letter briefs not to exceed five single-spaced pages-regarding MDL personal injury plaintiffs' submission of additional case documentation by no later than Friday, July 8, 2016. Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, Order No. 101 is modified to reflect that (a) jury questionnaires will be filled out on Friday, November 4, 2016 (rather than November 3), and the parties' jury strikes are now due on Wednesday, November 9, 2016 at 9:30 a.m. EST. Consistent with the Court's comments during the oral argument on New GM's motion to dismiss the TACC, by Friday, June 24, 2016, Lead Counsel and New GM shall each submit a letter brief (not to exceed six single-spaced pages) addressing relevant Missouri and Virginia law regarding defect manifestation, as well as the Ninth Circuit's decision in Living Designs, Inc. v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co., 431 F.3d 353 (9th Cir. 2005). Additionally, New GM shall file its notice of supplemental authority regarding the Takata litigation by Friday, June 24, 2016. Lead Counsel shall respond to GM's notice of supplemental authority by Tuesday, June 28, 2016. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/23/2016) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al., as per Chambers. (mro) Modified on 6/23/2016 (mro). Modified on 7/18/2016 (mro).
June 22, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 126 ORDER NO. 105 [Regarding Motions for Admission Pro Hac Vice for Attorneys of Record in Transferred Cases]: To avoid any confusion, effective immediately, Order No. 2 (Docket No. 26) is modified to make clear that, pursuant to Rule 2.1(c) of the Rules of Procedure of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, counsel who have appeared as counsel of record in an action transferred into MDL 2543 prior to its transfer into this District need not file a motion for pro hac vice admission before this Court. Any attorney who appears in a member case after its transfer (or, in a case directly filed in this District, after its filing) must apply for pro hac vice status in accordance with Order No. 2. Either way, all counsel in transferred cases are directed to visit the Court's website at http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov to apply for CM/ECF filing privileges. If an attorney is in need of assistance, please call the Help Desk at 212-805-0800. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/21/2016) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
June 14, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 125 ORDER NO. 104 [Appointing Citibank, N.A. as Escrow Agent over the Common Benefit Order Fund]: the Court hereby amends paragraph 28 of Order No. 42 to state as follows in its entirety: "By subsequent order of this Court, the Court will appoint a qualified entity, approved by both Plaintiffs' Co-Lead Counsel and Defendant, to serve as Escrow Agent over the Common Benefit Order Fund and to keep detailed records of all deposits to and withdrawals from the Fund. The Escrow Agent's fees will be paid from the Common Benefit Order Fund and will be considered a shared cost. The Plaintiffs' Liaison Counsel must provide a copy of this Order to the Escrow Agent. Plaintiffs' Co-Lead Counsel will be responsible for preparing tax returns and other tax filings in connection with the Common Benefit Order Fund." The Court hereby appoints Citibank to serve as that Escrow Agent, to perform the duties of the Escrow Agent described in Order No. 42, and the Court approves the fees to be charged by Citibank as set forth in Schedule B of the Escrow Agreement to be entered into by Plaintiffs' Co-Lead Counsel with Citi. The Court hereby amends paragraph 48 of Order No. 42 such that references to the term "CPA" shall be replaced by the term "Escrow Agent," and so that references to "monthly" are replaced by the term "quarterly." (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/14/2016) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn) Modified on 6/14/2016 (tn).
June 10, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 124 ORDER [Regarding Oral Argument on the Partial Motion To Dismiss the TACC]: On June 17, 2016, beginning at 9:15 a.m., the Court will hold oral argument on New GM's pending Motion To Dismiss portions of the Third Amended Consolidated Complaint. The Court intends to proceed topic-by-topic, with roughly 20 to 30 minutes total allocated to each side. The Court anticipates that oral argument will focus most heavily on the following topics, which the parties should be prepared to address Additionally, the parties did not address Virginia law on consumer and common-law fraud in any detail in their briefing on the Motion. They are hereby ORDERED to submit supplemental letter briefs, limited to a discussion of that topic with respect to Plaintiff Ashlee Hall-Abbott and not to exceed three single-spaced pages each, no later than June 24, 2016. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/10/2016) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
June 8, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 123 SCHEDULING ORDER: With apologies, the Court notes that an incorrect version of the rescheduling order in this case was docketed yesterday. (See Docket No. 2952). IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the conference and oral argument in this matter, previously scheduled for June 17, 2016, at 9:30 a.m., are RESCHEDULED to begin at 9:15 a.m. on the same date in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. Oral Argument set for 6/17/2016 at 09:15 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 6/17/2016 at 09:15 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/8/2016) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
June 7, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 122 SCHEDULING ORDER: that the conference and oral argument in this matter, previously scheduled for June 17, 2016, at 9:30 a.m., are RESCHEDULED to begin at 9:45 a.m. on the same date in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. Oral Argument set for 6/17/2016 at 09:45 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 6/17/2016 at 09:45 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/7/2016) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
May 27, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 121 ORDER NO. 103 [Amending the Restrictions on Use of Confidential and Highly Confidential Information]: Defendants and Lead Counsel for plaintiffs having consented thereto, and for good cause shown, Order No. 10 Paragraph 7(a) (Docket No. 294) is amended to state as follows: "Restriction on Use. Confidential and Highly Confidential must be used only in this proceeding or in any Related Litigation, except that (i) General Motors LLC shall be permitted to use such information to assist in identifying, reporting, or resolving any potential safety issue; and (ii) nothing in this Protective Order shall be construed as limiting any party from disclosing a potential safety defect to an appropriate government agency." (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/27/2016) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al, as per Chambers.(mro) Modified on 5/27/2016 (mro).
May 9, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 120 ORDER FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE in case 2:14-cv-02458-JMF; granting (2838) Motion for Hariklia Karis to Appear Pro Hac Vice in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 2838. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/9/2016) ***As per instructions from chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn)
May 3, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 119 ORDER NO. 99 [Regarding the April 20, 2016 Status Conference]: Status Conference set for 6/17/2016 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 7/28/2016 at 09:30 AM before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference/Cockram Final Pretrial Conference set for 9/7/2016 at 09:00 AM before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Oral Argument on New GM's motion to dismiss the TACC will be heard on 6/17/2016 at 09:30 AM before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, Bellwether Trial No. 5 (Cockram) shall take place between September 12 and 30, 2016, and Bellwether Trial No. 6 (Norville) between November 14 and December 2, 2016, as originally set forth in Order No. 75 (Docket No. 1305). By separate order, the Court will set pretrial deadlines for both trials. No later than Wednesday, May 11, 2016, the parties shall submit a joint proposal and agreed upon proposed order regarding whether and to what extent additional bellwether cases should be selected for discovery and trial. Consistent with the Court's comments, the parties will cooperate to prepare an inventory of pro se plaintiffs with claims pending in the MDL and will submit a joint update on the status of such plaintiffs no later than Friday, May 20, 2016, as well as their proposal(s) or position(s) regarding any action that should take place with respect to those parties. Consistent with the Court's comments, New GM will provide Lead Counsel with an opportunity to comment upon New GM's proposed order setting a deadline for all MDL 2543 personal injury and wrongful death plaintiffs who have not already done so to provide certain information and documents in specified formats, and will then subsequently submit the proposed order for the Court's consideration no later than Friday, May 27, 2016. Additionally, by no later than Friday, May 20, 2016, the parties should meet and confer and submit their joint request for appointment of the certified public accountant contemplated by the Common Benefit Order (Order No. 42, Docket No. 743), and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/3/2016) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn) Modified on 5/3/2016 (tn).
April 20, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 118 ORDER REFERRING CASE TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE. Order that case be referred to the Clerk of Court for assignment to a Magistrate Judge for Settlement. As discussed at the status conference held today, the Court hereby refers all cases in the MDL to Magistrate Judge Cott for settlement purposes. Any party who believes that it would be helpful to enlist the services of Judge Cott in that respect with respect to a case or group of cases in the MDL should contact his chambers in accordance with his Individual Rules and Practices (available at http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/judge/Cott). Referred to Magistrate Judge James L. Cott. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/20/2016) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
April 14, 2016 Filing 117 NOTICE of Notice of Conflict within the Plaintiffs' Group. Document filed by Berenice Summerville. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Peller, Gary)
March 17, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 116 ORDER: Per the Court's memo endorsement of yesterday (see 14-MD-2543, Docket No. 2551), the status conference in this matter previously scheduled for April 15, 2016 is RESCHEDULED to coincide with the Yingling final pretrial conference on April 20, 2016, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. SO ORDERED., ( Status Conference set for 4/20/2016 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/17/2016) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ama)
March 2, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 115 ORDER NO. 97 [Regarding Procedures for Exhibits and Demonstratives in Bellwether Trial No. 2 and Future Bellwether Trials]: The following deadlines and procedures supplement but do not replace the trial exhibit deadlines in Order No. 94 Paragraph 2(e) (Docket No. 2183). a. Branded Exhibit Exchange. Order No. 94 Paragraph 2(e) requires the parties to "submit their trial exhibit lists no later than February 18, 2016." The parties shall exchange branded copies of the exhibits identified on their February 18, 2016 exhibit list by Thursday, February 25, 2016. b. Objections. The parties shall exchange objections to trial exhibits by Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 10:30 a.m. Eastern Time. The parties shall meet and confer to resolve objections between Thursday, March 3, 2016 and Sunday, March 6, 2016. The parties are encouraged to raise disputes with the Court early regarding objections that the parties cannot resolve through the meet and confer process. c. Exhibits Identified After February 18, 2016. Each party may add up to ten (10) exhibits to its exhibit list by Wednesday, March 2, 2016 without a showing of good cause or mutual agreement ("Free Exhibits"). The parties reserve their rights to make evidentiary objections to the Free Exhibits by Friday, March 4, 2016. With the exception of the Free Exhibits, the parties may only add additional exhibits after February 18, 2016 by mutual agreement or upon a showing of good cause. d. Withdrawal of Exhibits. In the event a party withdraws or removes an exhibit from its exhibit list, any other party may reserve the right to use that exhibit at trial by giving written notice to the other party of its intent to use the exhibit within seven (7) days of receipt of the notification of the withdrawal of said exhibit. The following deadlines apply to Bellwether Trial Nos. 3-6, in addition to those set forth in Order No. 91 (Docket No. 2001) and paragraph I(1)(d), supra, as further set forth above. Exhibits and demonstratives to be utilized for the direct examination of a witness shall be exchanged by 9:00 a.m. Eastern Time two days before the day the exhibits are to be used. Exhibits and demonstratives to be utilized for the cross examination of a witness shall be exchanged by 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time two days before the day the exhibits and demonstratives are to be used. Exhibits used for impeachment purposes need not be disclosed in advance. During the course of any examination in front of the jury, whenever an exhibit or demonstrative is being published to the jury, whether direct examination or cross examination, counsel conducting the examination is encouraged to refer to the trial exhibit number (and page number, where a voluminous exhibit is being used) explicitly so that the record is clear as to what documents were shown to the jury, and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/2/2016) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
March 2, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 114 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: On February 8, 2016, New GM filed a brief requesting that three documents relating to its settlement with certain MDL Plaintiffs remain under seal: the Confidential Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU"), the Joint Retention Agreement for Special Masters Daniel Balhoff and John Perry, and the Joint Retention Agreement for the Qualified Settlement Fund ("QSF") Trustee. (See Docket No. 2252). The Court directed anyone opposing the permanent sealing of these documents to respond no later than February 19, 2016. (See Docket No. 2255). No one filed any opposition. In light of the fact that the request is unopposed, and because the Court finds that the sealing of the three documents is consistent with the presumption of access to judicial documents, New GM's application is GRANTED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/1/2016) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
March 1, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 113 ORDER NO. 96 [Regarding the February 23, 2016 Status Conference]: the Court will conduct Status Conferences on Friday, April 15, 2016, at 9:30 a.m. EDT and on Thursday, June 2, 2016, at 9:30 a.m. EDT in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. The parties should continue their coordination efforts in Related Actions pursuant to Order No. 15 (Docket No. 315) and keep the Court apprised of emerging coordination issues through their joint letter updates (see Order No. 8 V, Docket No. 249), now to be submitted on a monthly basis (see Docket No. 2366), or in separate letter updates, as circumstances require. Motion practice on the TACC shall continue according to the schedule set forth in Order No. 93 (Docket No. 2156). Additionally, the Court adopts the parties' proposal in the February 22, 2013 Memo Endorsement regarding certain amendments to the TACC to be filed within 30 days after the latter of (1) the Second Circuit's ruling on the pending appeal of the June Judgment or (2) this Court's ruling on New GM's February 24, 2016 motion to dismiss. (Docket No. 2323 paragraph 2.) Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the parties should meet-and-confer and submit a revised proposed order governing the procedures for trial exhibits and demonstratives in the Barthelemy trial. The parties shall submit a revised proposed order no later than March 7, 2016. Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the trial confidentiality procedure from Scheuer - whereby the parties may redact from exhibits offered into evidence information that is irrelevant to the issues presented in the trial - shall apply to Barthelemy and the remaining bellwether trials. (See Docket No. 88). Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the bellwether trial schedule shall not be modified, unless and until this Court orders otherwise. (Status Conference set for 4/15/2016 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 6/2/2016 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/1/2016) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
February 10, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 112 ORDER NO 95 -- Regarding Lance Cooper's Motions To Remove Co-Lead Counsel and for Reconsideration of the Order Approving the 2015 New GM Ignition Switch Qualified Settlement Fund: Upon review of the foregoing motion papers, and for detailed reasons to be provided in a forthcoming opinion, the Cooper Plaintiffs' motions are both DENIED in their entirety... Two arguably related applications remain open: New GM's motion to keep certain documents relating to its settlement with Lead Counsel under seal (Docket No. 2252) and the Protective Order Motion (Docket No. 2258; see supra note 1). Per the Court's Order of yesterday (Docket No. 2255), any opposition to New GM's sealing application shall be filed by February 19, 2016; if any opposition is filed, a ny reply shall be filed by February 26, 2016. Any opposition to the Protective Order Motion shall be filed by February 16, 2016; any reply shall be filed by February 18, 2016. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket Nos. 2179 and 2182. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/10/2016) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ab)
February 9, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 111 ORDER: that the status conference in this matter, previously scheduled for February 25, 2016, at 9:30 a.m., is RESCHEDULED for February 23, 2016, at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. (Status Conference set for 2/23/2016 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1106, Thurgood Marshal Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/9/2016) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
January 20, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 110 ORDER NO. 93 [Regarding Motion Practice Concerning the Third Amended Consolidated Complaint] re: (2020 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) Letter, filed by GM Ignition Switch MDL Plaintiffs, (2021 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) Letter, filed by General Motors LLC: that, having received and reviewed the parties' letter briefs (Docket Nos. 2020, 2021), motion practice concerning the Third Amended Consolidated Complaint ("TACC") shall proceed as follows: Motion practice shall be limited to named Plaintiffs whose claims are based on vehicles manufactured by New GM, including both Delta Ignition Switch Vehicles and non-Delta Ignition Switch vehicles manufactured by New GM, as such terms are defined in the TACC. Motion practice shall include the named Plaintiffs in the following states whose claims are based on vehicles manufactured by New GM: California, the District of Columbia, Florida, Louisiana, Maryland, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Virginia. Motion practice shall include the following claims of such Plaintiffs: claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), 18 U.S.C. 1961 et seq., the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, 15 U.S.C. 2301, et seq., for negligence, and state-law claims; but in each case only to the extent that such claims are brought by named Plaintiffs whose claims are based on vehicles manufactured by New GM. Motion practice contemplated under this paragraph will not preclude New GM from conducting additional motion practice related to allegations and claims in the TACC following any decision on appeal from a judgment of the Bankruptcy Court. New GM shall conduct motion practice under Paragraph 1 by filing a motion to dismiss by February 24, 2016. Plaintiffs will file their opposition by April 9, 2016. New GM will file its reply by April 30, 2016. New GM's memorandum to its motion to dismiss and Plaintiffs' opposition memorandum are limited to sixty (60) pages, and New GM's reply memorandum is limited to thirty (30) pages. New GM shall not be required to file an answer or any other response to the TACC unless and until further order of the Court. At this time, Plaintiffs may not conduct discovery into any additional alleged defects. Plaintiffs may renew their requests for such discovery after the Court rules on New GM's motion to dismiss. (Motions due by 2/24/2016. Responses due by 4/9/2016. Replies due by 4/30/2016.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 1/20/2016) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
January 11, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 109 ORDER FOR MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE in case 2:14-cv-02458-JMF; granting (2041) Motion for Nicholas Styant-Browne to Appear Pro Hac Vice in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 1/11/2016) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (cf)
January 8, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 108 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: (1997 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) Letter, filed by General Motors LLC. ENDORSEMENT: The Court agrees. Pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section X of Order No. 77, the parties shall file the relevant materials on ECF or with Sealed Records no later than January 12, 2016. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 1/7/2016) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
January 5, 2016 Set/Reset Deadlines: Brief due by 8/5/2016. Responses to Brief due by 1/26/2016 Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
January 5, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 107 ORDER NO. 91 [Regarding Revised Pre-Trial Deadlines and Procedures for MDL Bellwether Trial Nos. 26]: the following revised pretrial deadlines and show cause motion procedures for MDL Bellwether Trial Nos. 2-6. This Order supersedes Order No. 89 (Docket No. 1864), which is hereby vacated; the dates that have been modified from or added to those in Order No. 89 are underlined. Trial Two (Barthelemy/Spain) shall take place between March 14, 2016 and April 1, 2016; Trial Three (Yingling) shall take place between May 2, 2016 and May 20, 2016; Trial Four (Reid) shall take place between July 25, 2016 and August 12, 2016; Trial Five (Cockram) shall take place between September 12, 2016 and September 30, 2016; and Trial Six (Norville) shall take place between November 14, 2016 and December 2, 2016. Any dispositive motion, opposition, and reply in support of such motion must be submitted as further set forth in this order. A joint proposed pre-trial order must be submitted as further set forth in this order. Upon the conclusion of Bellwether Trial No. 6 (whether through dispositive motion practice or trial), the parties should meet and confer regarding procedures for show cause submissions to determine the applicability of the bellwether trial rulings on other cases pending in the MDL. Effect of This Order on Other Rules and Orders. To the extent not explicitly modified herein, the Court's Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases and Rules and Procedures for Trials and all other applicable orders of this Court remain in full force and effect.2 The Court may enter additional and/or modified orders regarding the pretrial schedule of MDL Bellwether Trial Nos. 26 as circumstances require, and as further set forth in this order. Motions due by 9/26/2016. Responses due by 8/19/2016. Replies due by 8/26/2016. Pretrial Order due by 10/14/2016. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 1/5/2016) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
December 22, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 106 ORDER NO. 90 [Regarding the December 17, 2015 Status Conference]: the Court will conduct the next Status Conference on Friday, February 26, 2016, at 9:30 a.m. EST in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. The parties should meet and confer regarding New GM's position that the plaintiffs' December 16, 2015 appeal from the Bankruptcy Court should be deferred pending the Second Circuit Appeal regarding the Bankruptcy Court's June 1, 2015 Judgment. The parties should notify the Court by Wednesday, December 23, at 12:00 p.m. EST of their respective positions in this regard. By Thursday, December 31, 2015, the parties should meet and confer regarding the deadlines for the subsequent bellwether trials set forth in Order No. 89 (Docket No. 1864) and propose any modifications consistent with the Court's goal to move the MDL forward at a "reasonable, but aggressive" pace. Unless and until the Court orders otherwise, the deadlines in Order No. 89 remain in full force. The parties should, by Wednesday, December 23, 2015, submit either a joint letter or separate letters advising the Court of their positions as to what the Court should do regarding the factual error in the December 7, 2015 Opinion and Order (Docket No. 1825). Within one week of the Court issuing a decision with respect to the motion to dismiss the TACC, the parties should submit a joint proposal or competing letter briefs regarding discovery of putative absent class members. Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the Court will defer ruling on any issues with respect to discovery of putative class members named in the TACC until after receiving the parties' submission(s) regarding motion practice on the TACC on Wednesday, January 6, 2016. The Court grants Mr. Peller's nunc pro tunc request for an extension of the deadlines set forth in Order No. 69 (Docket No. 1162) for Mr. Peller's clients until after the Second Circuit appeal initiated by the Elliott plaintiffs has been resolved. Except as specifically modified herein, Order No. 69 remains in full force and effect. Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the Court will defer addressing the common benefit billing dispute raised by Mr. Peller until a later date. (Status Conference set for 2/26/2016 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/22/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
December 15, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 105 ORDER terminating (159) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 2:14-cv-02458-JMF; terminating (159) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 2:14-cv-02713-JMF; terminating (159) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-02714-JMF; terminating (159) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-03326-JMF; terminating (155) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-03298-JMF; terminating (1883) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF; terminating (188) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04226-JMF; terminating (172) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04265-JMF; terminating (208) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04267-JMF; terminating (199) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04268-JMF; terminating (173) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04270-JMF; terminating (201) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04272-JMF; terminating (172) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04273-JMF; terminating (166) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04338-JMF; terminating (199) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04339-JMF; terminating (159) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04340-JMF; terminating (230) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04342-JMF; terminating (173) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04345-JMF; terminating (179) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04346-JMF; terminating (166) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04348-JMF; terminating (166) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04350-JMF; terminating (170) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04630-JMF; terminating (164) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04632-JMF; terminating (159) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04637-JMF; terminating (161) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04641-JMF; terminating (167) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04650-JMF; terminating (157) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04661-JMF; terminating (162) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04662-JMF; terminating (159) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04667-JMF; terminating (160) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04672-JMF; terminating (166) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04676-JMF; terminating (159) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04684-JMF; terminating (154) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04686-JMF; terminating (167) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04690-JMF; terminating (176) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04691-JMF; terminating (176) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04692-JMF; terminating (161) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04685-JMF; terminating (181) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04699-JMF; terminating (178) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04701-JMF; terminating (167) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04702-JMF; terminating (165) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04704-JMF; terminating (169) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04707-JMF; terminating (157) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04714-JMF; terminating (174) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04715-JMF; terminating (171) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04717-JMF; terminating (162) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04720-JMF; terminating (182) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04727-JMF; terminating (160) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04731-JMF; terminating (165) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04732-JMF; terminating (165) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04738-JMF; terminating (166) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04741-JMF; terminating (202) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04751-JMF; terminating (168) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04752-JMF; terminating (166) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04754-JMF; terminating (166) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04755-JMF; terminating (185) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04756-JMF; terminating (160) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04758-JMF; terminating (152) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04759-JMF; terminating (152) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04760-JMF; terminating (158) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04764-JMF; terminating (160) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04768-JMF; terminating (163) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04771-JMF; terminating (176) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04775-JMF; terminating (161) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04778-JMF; terminating (153) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04781-JMF; terminating (157) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04784-JMF; terminating (161) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04798-JMF; terminating (163) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04799-JMF; terminating (152) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04801-JMF; terminating (160) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04802-JMF; terminating (165) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04804-JMF; terminating (174) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04808-JMF; terminating (158) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04810-JMF; terminating (167) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04811-JMF; terminating (153) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04857-JMF; terminating (154) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04858-JMF; terminating (161) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-04859-JMF; terminating (139) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05035-JMF; terminating (153) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05137-JMF; terminating (150) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05323-JMF; terminating (153) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05325-JMF; terminating (171) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05326-JMF; terminating (186) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05331-JMF; terminating (148) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05332-JMF; terminating (178) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05336-JMF; terminating (141) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05338-JMF; terminating (154) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05340-JMF; terminating (148) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05345-JMF; terminating (141) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05347-JMF; terminating (161) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05349-JMF; terminating (152) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05350-JMF; terminating (158) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05351-JMF; terminating (150) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05356-JMF; terminating (147) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05358-JMF; terminating (144) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05328-JMF; terminating (152) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05458-JMF; terminating (182) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05461-JMF; terminating (153) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05501-JMF; terminating (147) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05503-JMF; terminating (142) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05506-JMF; terminating (145) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05746-JMF; terminating (145) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05750-JMF; terminating (143) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05752-JMF; terminating (145) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05754-JMF; terminating (136) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05715-JMF; terminating (148) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05880-JMF; terminating (153) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05881-JMF; terminating (146) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05850-JMF; terminating (181) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-05810-JMF; terminating (143) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-06018-JMF; terminating (133) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-06830-JMF; terminating (141) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-06924-JMF; terminating (140) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend in case 1:14-cv-07224-JMF; terminating (125) Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Amend
December 15, 2015 Filing 104 LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to Amend Elliott, Sesay and Bledsoe Complaints addressed to Judge Jesse M. Furman from Gary Peller dated December 15, 2015. Document filed by Berenice Summerville.Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Peller, Gary)
December 14, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 103 ORDER: On December 11, 2015, New GM submitted via email proposed redactions - to which Plaintiffs consented - for four exhibits to the crime-fraud motion to compel briefing. (See Docket No. 1794). The Court agrees that these redactions are narrowly tailored to personal and confidential information, and are otherwise consistent with the presumption in favor of public access to judicial documents. See, e.g., Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006). No later than December 18, 2015, New GM shall file the redacted versions on ECF and the unredacted versions with Sealed Records, to the extent the parties have not already done so. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/14/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
December 14, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 102 Vacated as per Judge's Order dated 1/5/2016, Doc. # 2001 ORDER NO. 89 [Regarding Pre-Trial Deadlines and Procedures for MDL Bellwether Trial Nos. 26]: the Early Trial Cases (see Order No. 25 (14-MD-2543 Docket No. 422)) will be tried on the following schedule: a. Trial Two (Barthelemy/Spain) shall take place between March 14, 2016 and April 1, 2016; b. Trial Three (Yingling) shall take place between May 2, 2016 and May 20, 2016; c. Trial Four (Reid) shall take place between July 25, 2016 and August 12, 2016; d. Trial Five (Cockram) shall take place between September 12, 2016 and September 30, 2016; and e. Trial Six (Norville) shall take place between November 14, 2016 and December 2, 2016. Any dispositive motion, opposition, and reply in support of such motion must be submitted no later than the dates as further set forth in this order. Unless the Court orders otherwise, memoranda shall comply with the page limits and other requirements set forth in this Court's Local Rules. Consolidated Daubert motions, not to exceed 50 double-spaced pages per opening brief, must be submitted no later than the dates as further set forth in this order. Responses are not to exceed 50 double-spaced pages per brief, are due fourteen (14) days after filing of the respective motions. Replies, not to exceed 20 double-spaced pages per brief, are due on the earlier date of either seven (7) days after responsive briefs are filed. The parties are encouraged to file briefs ahead of the respective deadlines. Motions in limine, not to exceed 15 double-spaced pages per opening brief, are to be submitted no later than the dates as further set forth in this order. Responses, not to exceed 15 double-spaced pages per brief, are due ten (10) days after the filing of the respective motions. Replies, not to exceed five double-spaced pages, are due seven (7) days after responsive briefs are filed for the respective motions. The parties are encouraged to file motions and briefs ahead of the respective deadlines. A joint proposed pre-trial order must be submitted no later than the dates as further set forth in this order. To the extent not explicitly modified herein, the Court's Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases and Rules and Procedures for Trials and all other applicable orders of this Court remain in full force and effect. The Court may enter additional and/or modified orders regarding the pretrial schedule of MDL Bellwether Trial Nos. 26 as circumstances require. (Brief due by 8/5/2016. Motions due by 9/26/2016. Proposed Pretrial Order due by 10/14/2016. Responses due by 8/19/2016. Replies due by 8/26/2016. Responses to Brief due by 8/26/2016) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/14/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn) Modified on 1/5/2016 (tn).
December 11, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 101 ORDER APPROVING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE 2015 NEW GM IGNITION SWITCH QUALIFIED SETTLEMENT FUND granting (1798) Motion to Approve in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF: Establishment of the 2015 New GM Ignition Switch Qualified Settlement Fund (the "Trust") is approved in accordance with the terms of the trust agreement (the "Trust Agreement"), which is attached to the motion, and the Court retains continuing jurisdiction and supervision thereof, in accordance with the terms of the Trust Agreement. The Trust is a "qualified settlement fund" within the meaning of section 468B of the Internal Revenue Code and the Treasury Regulations thereunder, and shall be operated in a manner consistent with the rules of Treasury Regulation Section 1.468B-1, et seq. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 1798. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/11/2015) ***As Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn)
December 11, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 100 ORDER APPOINTING DANIEL J. BALHOFF AND JOHN W. PERRY, JR. AS JOINT SPECIAL MASTERS IN THE SETTLEMENT OF CERTAIN CASES granting (1499) Motion to Approve in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF: Daniel J. Balhoff and John W. Perry, Jr. are hereby appointed as joint Special Masters to perform the duties consented to by the Parties in their Memorandum of Understanding. The Special Masters shall proceed with all reasonable diligence. The Special Masters may have confidential ex parte communications with Claimants' Counsel, Claimants, and New GM in relation to their roles as Special Masters, to the extent permitted by and subject to the limitations described in the Parties' Memorandum of Understanding. Such ex parte communications shall not be deemed to have waived any attorney-client or other privileges. To execute the responsibilities and duties of their office, the Special Masters shall be vested with the powers described and contemplated under the Parties' Memorandum of Understanding. The Special Masters shall not be vested by this Court with any additional powers described and contemplated in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 53 except as and to the extent enumerated in the Parties' Memorandum of Understanding. The Special Masters shall be compensated privately as specified in the Parties' Memorandum of Understanding, which shall be set forth in detail in the contract to be entered into between the Parties and the Special Masters. Unless expressly authorized by the Parties in accordance with the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding, the Special Masters shall not disclose any confidential information or documents obtained through or created in their roles. While the Court does not currently anticipate requesting formal reports and recommendations from the Special Masters, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(b)(2)(C)-(D), (e), if the Court does request the same, the Special Masters shall reduce any formal order, finding, report, or recommendation to writing to be filed (under seal or publicly, as determined by the Court). See, e.g., In re FEMA Trailer Formaldehyde Prods. Liab. Litig., No. MDL 07-1873, 2011 WL 5038849, at *4 (E.D. La. Oct. 24, 2011). While the Court does not anticipate having any ex parte communications with the Special Masters, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(b)(2)(B), any such communications shall be limited to matters general to the settlement process and its progress and shall not include specifics, including parties' positions with respect to particular cases. The Special Masters shall advise the parties before communicating with the Court on an ex parte basis. New GM shall promptly file the Memorandum of Understanding and the two contracts at issue with the Sealed Records Department and those documents shall be maintained under seal unless and until the Court orders otherwise. As discussed during the telephone conference held on October 20, 2015, any party who believes that the materials should be kept under seal (or redacted) shall show cause in writing why that is consistent with the presumption in favor of public access to judicial documents. In light of the holidays and the many deadlines relating to the first bellwether trial, the Court extends the deadline for that submission to 45 days from today. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 1499. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/11/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn)
December 9, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 99 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on (1659 in case number 14md2543) denying (1577) Motion to Dismiss in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. ENDORSEMENT: New GM has not contested Lead Counsel's certification that Ms. Glyttov has met the requirements of Order No. 25. Accordingly, its motion to dismiss Ms. Glyttov is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 1577. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/9/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn)
December 8, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 98 ORDER: that the next status conference in this matter, previously scheduled for December 18, 2015, at 9:30 a.m., is RESCHEDULED for December 17, 2015, at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. The conference will also be transmitted through CourtCall at that time. (See Order No. 19, Docket No. 350). (Status Conference set for 12/17/2015 at 01:30 PM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/8/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
December 3, 2015 Filing 97 LETTER addressed to Judge Jesse M. Furman from Gary Peller dated December 3, 2015 re: Status Hearing November 20, 2015. Document filed by Berenice Summerville.Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Peller, Gary)
December 1, 2015 Set/Reset Deadlines: Brief due by 12/8/2015. Deposition due by 12/15/2015. Motions due by 12/4/2015. Proposed Pretrial Order due by 12/18/2015. Responses due by 12/14/2015 Replies due by 12/21/2015. Reply to Response to Brief due by 12/21/2015. Responses to Brief due by 12/17/2015 Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
December 1, 2015 Set/Reset Hearings: Final Pretrial Conference set for 1/6/2016 at 09:00 AM before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Jury Selection set for 1/6/2016 at 09:00 AM before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 12/18/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 2/26/2016 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn) Modified on 12/1/2015 (tn).
December 1, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 96 ORDER NO. 86 [Regarding the November 20, 2015 Status Conference and Revised Pretrial Deadlines] denying without prejudice (1416) Motion to Amend/Correct; denying without prejudice (1417) Motion to Amend/Correct; denying without prejudice (1418) Motion to Amend/Correct; denying without prejudice (1419) Motion to Amend/Correct; denying without prejudice (1420) Motion to Amend/Correct; denying without prejudice (1422) Motion to Amend/Correct; denying without prejudice (1424) Motion to Amend/Correct; denying without prejudice (1426) Motion to Amend/Correct; denying without prejudice (1427) Motion to Amend/Correct; denying without prejudice (1432) Motion for Leave to File Document; denying without prejudice (1434) Motion for Leave to File Document; denying without prejudice (1435) Motion for Leave to File Document; denying without prejudice (1436) Motion for Leave to File Document; denying without prejudice (1437) Motion for Leave to File Document; denying without prejudice (1438) Motion for Leave to File Document; denying without prejudice (1439) Motion for Leave to File Document; denying without prejudice (1485) Motion for Leave to File Document; denying without prejudice (1527) Motion to Amend/Correct; denying without prejudice (1528) Motion to Amend/Correct; denying without prejudice (1529) Motion to Amend/Correct in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF; denying without prejudice (134) Motion for Leave to File Document in case 1:14-cv-05881-JMF; denying without prejudice (114) Motion to Amend/Correct in case 1:14-cv-08892-JMF; denying without prejudice (104) Motion for Leave to File Document in case 1:14-cv-09469-JMF; denying without prejudice (78) Motion for Leave to File Document in case 1:14-cv-10006-JMF; denying without prejudice (81) Motion to Amend/Correct in case 1:15-cv-00550-JMF; denying without prejudice (76) Motion to Amend/Correct in case 1:15-cv-02033-JMF; denying without prejudice (71) Motion for Leave to File Document; denying without prejudice (72) Motion for Leave to File Document in case 1:15-cv-02089-JMF; denying without prejudice (53) Motion to Amend/Correct in case 1:15-cv-02493-JMF; denying without prejudice (53) Motion to Amend/Correct in case 1:15-cv-03592-JMF; denying without prejudice (43) Motion to Amend/Correct in case 1:15-cv-03641-JMF; denying without prejudice (45) Motion for Leave to File Document; denying without prejudice (46) Motion for Leave to File Document in case 1:15-cv-04088-JMF; denying without prejudice (35) Motion to Amend/Correct in case 1:15-cv-04182-JMF; denying without prejudice (37) Motion to Amend/Correct in case 1:15-cv-04768-JMF; denying without prejudice (14) Motion to Amend/Correct in case 1:15-cv-06233-JMF; denying without prejudice (16) Motion to Amend/Correct in case 1:15-cv-06452-JMF; denying without prejudice (14) Motion for Leave to File Document in case 1:15-cv-06530-JMF; denying without prejudice (16) Motion to Amend/Correct in case 1:15-cv-06591-JMF; denying without prejudice (15) Motion to Amend/Correct in case 1:15-cv-06990-JMF: the Court will conduct additional Status Conferences on the following dates: Friday, December 18, 2015, and Friday, February 26, 2016. Further, unless the Court orders or indicates otherwise, all Status Conferences will begin at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time and will be held in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. By 12/4/2015 New GM should file an amended Motion In Limine No. 7 in light of the Bankruptcy Court's November 9, 2015 Decision. Order No. 85 (Docket No. 1694) is amended as follows: Paragraph 1(f) is amended to read as follows: Daubert Motions: By 12/4/2015 each side shall be allowed to file one consolidated memorandum of law (not to exceed 50 double-spaced pages) in support of any Daubert motions. Responses (not to exceed 50 double-spaced pages), are due by 12/14. Replies (not to exceed 20 double-spaced pages) are due by 12/21. Paragraph 1(i) is amended to read as follows: Joint Pretrial Order: The parties shall submit their joint pretrial order (consistent with the Court's Individual Rules and Practices for Civil Cases, except as stated herein or in Order Nos. 78 and 85) no later than 12/18/2015, at 12:00 p.m. EST. No pretrial memoranda shall be submitted for the Scheuer trial except upon a showing of good cause. Except as amended herein, Order No. 85 remains in full force and effect. The parties should submit a proposed order by 12/11/2015, addressing the treatment of confidential evidence, if any, at the Scheuer trial. Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, the order of the bellwether trials is hereby amended (see Docket Nos. 1217, 1239), such that the Yingling case shall be conducted as Bellwether Trial No. 3, and the Cockram case shall be conducted as Bellwether Trial No. 5. By no later than 12/16/2015, MDL plaintiffs represented by Mr. Gary Peller shall file amended complaints that comply with the Bankruptcy Court's November 9, 2015 Decision. Motions for leave to amend complaints that the Court previously stayed pending resolution of certain issues by the Bankruptcy Court are hereby denied without prejudice, and are subject to renewal within 21 days after the Court lifts the stay pursuant to Order No. 1 (Docket No. 19) for each respective case. The Clerk of Court is therefore directed to terminate the following motions as further set forth in this order. By no later than 12/11/2015, the parties should submit a proposed order regarding standard pretrial deadlines for the subsequent MDL Bellwether Trials. The parties shall brief the admissibility of specific other similar incident ("OSI") evidence and related witnesses in the first bellwether trial - including the specific purpose(s) for which that evidence is offered and to which the witnesses will testify - according to the following schedule. Plaintiff shall submit his opening brief, not to exceed thirty-five double-spaced pages, on December 8, 2015. New GM shall submit its opposition brief, not to exceed thirty-five double-spaced pages, on December 17, 2015. Plaintiff shall submit his reply, not to exceed fifteen double-spaced pages, on December 21, 2015, and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/1/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn) Modified on 12/1/2015 (tn).
November 25, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 95 OPINION AND ORDER re: (1135 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION to Compel General Motors, LLC to Produce Documents From New GM and King & Spalding, LLC Based on the Crime Fraud Exception UNREDACTED filed by GM Ignition Switch MDL Plaintiffs, (1031 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION to Compel General Motors, LLC to Compel General Motors to PRODUCE DOCUMENTS FROM NEW GM AND KING & SPALDING LLC BASED ON THE CRIME-FRAUD EXCEPTION filed by GM Ignition Switch MDL Plaintiffs: The issue presented by this motion is not whether there is probable cause to believe that New GM committed a crime or fraud by concealing the ignition switch defect from its regulators and the general public. The recent criminal charges filed against New GM indicate there is probable cause to so believe, and Plaintiffs in this MDL may ultimately be able to prove that New GM committed egregious acts for which it should be held to account (and that settling the Chansuthus, Sullivan, and Melton matters facilitated them). Instead, the issue presented by this motion is whether, under the well-established principles that govern application of the crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege and attorney work product doctrine, Plaintiffs have shown that the communications and materials they seek were made with the intent to further a crime or fraud, thereby warranting their disclosure. For the reasons stated above, the Court concludes that, however troubling some of New GM's conduct may have been, Plaintiffs have failed to make that showing. Further, mindful of the fact that Plaintiffs were already provided access to a substantial cache of documents that would otherwise have been subject to the attorney-client privilege, the Court concludes that there is no basis even to review the materials at issue (or a subset of those materials) in camera. Put simply, if there were "a factual basis" to conclude that New GM and K&S were communicating or working in furtherance of a crime or fraud, one would expect to see some evidence in those communications - which K&S and New GM had no reason to believe would see the light of day when they were made - that they were made with such an intent. Zolin, 491 U.S. at 572. Because Plaintiffs point to no such evidence, the Court concludes that Plaintiffs' motion to compel must be DENIED. The parties submitted portions of their briefs in redacted form (some of which has since been unredacted) and certain exhibits under seal because New GM had designated the information as "highly confidential." (See, e.g., Docket Nos. 1156, 1255; see also Docket Nos. 1101, 1116). In this Opinion and Order, the Court has quoted from those materials; out of an abundance of caution, the Court has redacted those portions from the version filed publicly. As the Court has repeatedly noted, however, the mere fact that information is subject to a confidentiality agreement between litigants is not a valid basis to overcome the presumption in favor of public access to judicial documents. See, e.g., Dandong v. Pinnacle Performance Ltd., No. 10-CV-8086 (JMF), 2012 WL 6217646, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 3, 2012) ("The consent of the parties is not a valid basis to justify sealing, as the rights involved are the rights of the public." (internal quotation marks omitted)); Vasquez v. City of N. Y., No. 10-CV-6277 (LBS), 2012 WL 4377774, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 24, 2012) (similar). Accordingly, and in accordance with the procedures set out in Section X of MDL Order No. 77 (Docket No. 1349), any party who believes the materials should remain under seal or in redacted form (including, but not limited to, the portions of this Opinion and Order than have been redacted) shall file a letter brief within seven days regarding the propriety of doing so. See, e.g., Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006) (discussing the presumption in favor of public access). The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket Nos. 1031 and 1135. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 11/25/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
November 17, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 94 ORDER NO. 85 [Regarding Pretrial Deadlines for the First Bellwether Trial and Pleading Deadlines for the Other Early Trial Cases]: Third Amended Scheuer Complaint: Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint that complies with the Bankruptcy Courts November 9, 2015 Decision no later than November 17, 2015. New GM shall file a response no later than December 14, 2015. Plaintiffs submitted their expert rebuttal reports on November 13, 2015. To the extent that New GM wishes to re-depose any of those experts, such depositions shall be completed no later than November 24, 2015. Any witness on the Initial Witness List who has not been deposed in the MDL shall be made available for deposition no later than December 15, 2015. In accordance with Order No. 78, all motions in limine shall be filed no later than December 4, 2015. In accordance with Order No. 78, Daubert motions, not to exceed 15 double-spaced pages per brief, must be submitted no later than December 4, 2015; and as further set forth in this order. The parties shall file any dispositive motions with regard to the Scheuer Complaint no later than December 4, 2015. Responses to any dispositive motions shall be filed no later than December 14, 2015. Any replies shall be filed no later than December 21, 2015. Joint proposed pretrial order and respective pretrial memoranda (consistent with the Court's Individual Rules and Practices for Civil Cases, except as stated herein or in Order No. 78) no later than December 18, 2015, at noon. Final Pretrial Conference set for 1/6/2016 at 09:00 AM before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Given that January 11, 2016 is a firm trial date, the Court is unlikely to grant any further extensions of the foregoing dates and deadlines absent extraordinary circumstances or confidence that the extension would have no effect on the trial date. For ease of reference, the following chart summarizes all of the foregoing pretrial deadlines for the first bellwether trial, as further set forth in this order. If any party should later move to amend any of these deadlines, that party shall submit as part of the letter motion requesting the extension a revised version of this chart with the proposed amendments. With respect to the other Early Trial Cases, the Court adopts the parties' proposed amended deadlines for the filing of amended complaints and responses, as further set forth in this order. Amended Pleadings due by 3/26/2016. Motions due by 12/4/2015. Responses due by 12/14/2015 Replies due by 12/21/2015. Deposition due by 12/15/2015. Proposed Pretrial Order due by 12/18/2015. Jury Selection set for 1/6/2016 at 09:00AM before Judge Jesse M. Furman. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 11/17/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
November 3, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 93 ORDER NO. 84 [Regarding the Phase Three Plan for Discovery and Motion Practice]: Unless and until the Court orders otherwise, the scope of Phase Three Discovery shall be limited to: (a) Plaintiffs' alleged economic loss damages claimed in the Second Amended Consolidated Complaint (Docket No. 1139) ("SACC"); (b) continuing the meet and confer process and completion of the production of documents and information in response to Plaintiffs' existing document requests relating to New GM's Customer Assistance Center (CAC), Technical Assistance Center (TAC), and Global Warranty Claims Management databases, related to Phase One and Phase Two Recalls; and (c) discovery, including depositions, of the named Plaintiffs in the SACC who purchased or leased vehicles manufactured and sold by New GM. In addition, the parties shall meet and confer with respect to whether or to what extent Phase Three should include discovery about New GM's Certified Pre-Owned ("CPO") program and shall submit a joint letter or competing letters on that subject no later than November 16, 2015. Plaintiffs may depose in Phase Three GM witnesses with knowledge of the issues identified in Paragraph 2, supra, but only if those individuals were not previously deposed in the MDL, unless the Parties agree otherwise or the Court orders otherwise upon a showing of good cause. By agreement of the parties or by the Court's order for good cause shown, Plaintiffs may also take additional depositions of GM witnesses with knowledge of NHTSA Recall No. 14-V-047, Phase One Recalls, or Phase Two Recalls (see Order Nos. 12, 20, and 31; Docket Nos. 296, 383, and 526), as further set forth in this order. During Phase Three, New GM shall take discovery, including depositions, of named plaintiffs alleged in the SACC who purchased or leased cars manufactured and sold by New GM. The parties should meet and confer regarding depositions sought by Plaintiffs and depositions sought by New GM in an attempt to reach an agreement regarding a reasonable and coordinated deposition schedule, in order to ensure that each witness is deposed only once as required by Order No. 25, Paragraph 43. (See also Order No. 15 Paragraph 22, Docket No. 315). If the parties cannot reach agreement, any remaining disputes will be decided by the Court. The parties shall meet and confer to attempt to reach agreement on (1) what, if any, claims and allegations in the SACC meet the conditions set forth above (or as to which motion practice now would otherwise be appropriate); and (2) the procedures (timing, length of briefs, etc.) for motion practice as to such claims and allegations, and should submit an agreed upon order for the Court's consideration by Monday, November 16, 2015. If the parties are unable to reach an agreement, Lead Counsel and counsel for the Defendants shall each submit a letter brief (not to exceed five single-spaced pages) by that same date setting forth their respective positions and attaching their proposals, as well as a redline showing the differences between the competing proposals; counsel should also be prepared to address the issue at the status conference to be held on November 20, 2015. Phase Three Discovery shall begin immediately. The Court will later set a date for substantial completion of Phase Three Discovery after the scope of document discovery into the Phase Three Defects is determined. The parties are directed to meet and confer and propose, by December 1, 2015, a date for the completion of Phase Three Discovery consistent with the Court's desire to maintain "a reasonable, but aggressive" schedule. The parties are directed to submit a proposed Phase Four Discovery Plan no later than thirty (30) days prior to the close of Phase Three Discovery, and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 11/3/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
October 19, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 92 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: (1510 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) Notice (Other), filed by Delphi Automotive Systems, LLC. ENDORSEMENT: In accordance with the procedures set forth in Section X of Order No. 77 (Docket No. 1349), the parties shall file an unredacted version of the letter brief and its exhibits on ECF no later than October 22, 2015. As per instructions from chambers, Filed In All Cases. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/19/2015) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(kgo) Modified on 10/19/2015 (kgo).
October 16, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 91 ORDER NO. 83 [Regarding the October 9, 2015 Status Conference]: the Court will conduct additional Status Conferences on the following dates: Friday, November 20, 2015, and Friday, December 18, 2015. Further, unless the Court orders or indicates otherwise, all Status Conferences will begin at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time and will be held in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. The parties are to continue their coordination efforts in Related Actions pursuant to Order No. 15 (14-MD-2543, Docket No. 315) and keep the Court apprised of emerging coordination issues through their biweekly joint letter updates (see Order No. 8 V, 14-MD-2543, Docket No. 249) or in separate letter updates, as circumstances require. Upon review of the parties' letter briefs, the Court will permit plaintiffs' requested depositions of Amber Hendricks and Lisa Stacey. No further deviations from the existing schedule and deposition protocols will be permitted absent exceptional circumstances. The Court sustains Delphi's objection to inquiry during a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition into its communications with counsel representing Plaintiffs; however, the Court overrules Delphi's objection to inquiry into the destruction of certain boxes of documents and whether they included materials relating to the ignition switch. Consistent with the Court's comments at the Status Conference, New GM and Delphi are directed to meet and confer regarding revisions to the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition notice to Delphi. New GM and Lead Counsel should meet and confer with counsel for former New GM General Counsel, Michael Millikin, and propose a briefing schedule concerning the purported trial subpoena for Mr. Millikin's appearance at MDL Bellwether Trial #1. The parties should meet and confer regarding the necessity and permissibility of plaintiffs' submission of rebuttal expert reports after New GM produces its expert reports. The parties are to raise any issues still in dispute with the Court either jointly or in separate letter briefs, not to exceed five single-spaced pages, no later than Friday, October 23, 2015. The parties should submit specific questionnaires for the Court's consideration and evaluation no later than Friday, November 20, 2015. (See Order No. 78, 14-MD-2543, Docket No. 1350.) The parties should identify, preferably jointly, questions that are objective, simple, straightforward, and would require disqualification of a juror for cause without any need for further inquiry. In a separate category, the parties should identify additional questions that they believe should be asked in the context of the questionnaire. The Court defers motion practice on the Second Amended Consolidated Complaint until at least after the Bankruptcy Court rules on the issues pending before it. The parties should submit an agreed upon proposed order regarding the Phase Three Discovery Plan by October 16, 2015. The parties should be prepared to discuss procedures for resolving issues related to public access in connection with the bellwether trials during the November 20, 2015 Status Conference, and as further set forth in this order. Status Conference set for 11/20/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 12/18/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/16/2015) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
October 16, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 90 ORDER re: (1499 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) JOINT MOTION to Approve Entry of an Agreed Order Regarding the Appointment of Special Masters filed by General Motors LLC: Telephone Conference set for 10/21/2015 at 10:00 AM before Judge Jesse M. Furman, to discuss the motion and proposed order. At that time, Plaintiffs' counsel shall call the Court, with counsel for New GM on the line, at (212) 805-0282. Additionally, no later than October 19, 2015, the parties shall submit their Memorandum of Understanding to the Court by e-mail, to be filed under seal, so that the Court may make an informed ruling on the proposed order and contemplated settlement process. Counsel should be prepared to address the following issues, as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/16/2015) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
October 16, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 89 ORDER NO. 82 in case 2:14-cv-02458-JMF; granting (1504) Letter Motion for Extension of Time in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF: New GM's letter motion seeking an extension of time to submit corrections to the deposition transcript of Peter Judis (14-MD-2543, Docket No. 1504) is hereby GRANTED. Additionally, going forward, the deadline to submit corrections to a deposition transcript under Order No. 36 66 (Docket No. 604) may be extended for up to thirty (30) days on written agreement between Lead Counsel and counsel for New GM, without the need for approval by the Court. Except as herein modified, Paragraph 66 of Order No. 36 remains in effect. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543, Docket No. 1504. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/16/2015) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn)
September 24, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 88 ORDER NO. 81 [Regarding Amendment of Certain Personal Injury/Wrongful Death Complaints]: Any Plaintiff moving for leave to file an amended complaint shall file the motion on both the MDL docket and the docket of the individual member case and, for ease of review, shall attach as an exhibit to that motion a redline indicating all changes between the current complaint and the proposed amended complaint. Any filings relating to the motion, including but not limited to the letters required by this Order, shall also be filed on both the MDL docket and the docket of the individual member case. Within one week of any such motion (or one week from the date of this Order with respect to motions already filed), New GM shall file a letter stating whether: (a) it consents to the motion without reservation; (b) it consents to the motion, with a reservation of rights to litigate any issues (to be identified with particularity) before the Bankruptcy Court; (c) it believes that the motion should be stayed pending adjudication of issues (to be identified with particularity) before the Bankruptcy Court; or (d) it opposes the motion. Plaintiffs in member cases Hoskins, 15-CV-0409; Dowling, 15-CV-2033; Smith, 15-CV-2493; Leloneck, 15-CV-3641; Fobbs, 15-CV-4182; Rowe, 15-CV-4768; Modeste, 15-CV-5995; Keeler, 15-CV-6233; Brown, 15-CV-6452; and Gregory, 15-CV-6591 shall file or refile, as appropriate, their motions to amend on the MDL docket, 14-MD-2543, in accordance with the procedures set forth above (among other things, including a redline indicating all changes between the current complaint and the proposed amended complaint), by September 30, 2015. And as further set forth in this order. (Motions due by 9/30/2015.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 9/24/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn)
September 11, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 87 ORDER NO. 79 [Regarding Pending Motions To Seal, To Dismiss, and To Reinstate Complaints] in case 2:14-cv-02458-JMF; granting (1230) Motion to Vacate; denying (1247) Motion to Dismiss; granting (1295) Motion to Seal; granting (1297) Motion to Seal; granting (1299) Motion to Seal in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF; granting (114) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney; granting (63) Motion to Vacate in case 1:15-cv-02033-JMF: New GM's motion to seal its letter brief regarding the deposition of Michael Robinson is GRANTED. (See 14-MD-2543 Docket Nos. 1295, 1296). Plaintiffs' motion to seal their letter brief regarding the deposition of Michael Robinson is GRANTED, with the exception of the language in footnote 1. The unopposed motions to vacate dismissal of the claims of Jamie Lee Dowling, James Boyd, and Debra O'Neill are GRANTED. The motion to dismiss the claims of Berenice Summerville, without prejudice, is DENIED on consent of New GM. Ms. Marino is hereby ORDERED to correct any deficiency with regard to her PFS by Friday, September 18, 2015. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of her claims with prejudice. With regard to plaintiff John Cameron, counsel's unopposed motion to withdraw is GRANTED. Mr. Cameron has thirty days to file a complete PFS in accordance with Order No. 25. If he does not, his claims will be dismissed with prejudice. No later than September 14, 2015, New GM shall serve a copy of this Order on Mr. Cameron, who is now proceeding pro se, and file proof of such service on ECF. The motion to dismiss is DENIED with respect to Joseph and Stephanie Hamilton, and their claims are reinstated. The Court GRANTS the motion to dismiss with prejudice with regard to Gelisa Hayes and Darlene Robinett, for the reasons further set forth in this order. In light of the foregoing, the claims of Gelisa Hayes and Darlene Robinett are hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. See In re World Trade Ctr. Disaster Site Litig., 722 F.3d at 487 (holding "that the court did not exceed the bounds of its discretion in dismissing the noncompliant plaintiffs' complaints"); and as further set forth in this order. The Clerk of Court is directed to reinstate Jamie Lee Dowling, James Boyd, Debra O'Neill, Joseph Hamilton, and Stephanie Hamilton as plaintiffs in this action; to terminate Gelisa Hayes and Darlene Robinett as plaintiffs in this action; and to terminate 14-MD-2543 Docket Nos. 1230, 1247, 1295, 1297, 1299; 14-CV-8385 Docket No. 114; and 15-CV-2033 Docket No. 63. Attorney Daniel T. DeFeo and Agostinho J. Ribeiro terminated in case 1:14-cv-08385-JMF. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 9/11/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn)
September 10, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 86 ORDER: On September 4, 2015, the Court received the email attached here as Exhibit 1, requesting leave to include a redacted exhibit in non-party King & Spalding's Sur-Reply to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of Documents from New GM and King & Spalding Based on the Crime Fraud Exception. (See Docket No. 1341). In accordance with Paragraph 6(B) of the Court's Individual Rules and Practices and MDL Order Nos. 10 and 77, King & Spalding is hereby ORDERED to file on ECF an appropriate motion to seal the redacted material by Monday, September 14, 2015. (Motions due by 9/14/2015.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 9/10/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
September 10, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 85 ORDER NO. 78 [Regarding Amendment of Order No. 25 Paragraph 50's Deadlines for MDL Bellwether Trial #1]: that the Deadlines for MDL Bellwether Trial #1, as set out in Order No. 25 Paragraph 50 and this Court's Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases and Rules and Procedures for Trials, are amended and superseded as follows: The first Early Trial Case ("MDL Bellwether Trial #1") will start on January 11, 2016. The parties shall submit any dispositive motions for MDL Bellwether Trial #1 by November 10, 2015. Any opposition to a dispositive motion shall be filed by December 1, 2015, and any reply shall be filed by December 7, 2015. Daubert motions, not to exceed 15 double-spaced pages per brief, must be submitted no later than December 4, 2015. Responses, not to exceed 15 double-spaced pages per brief, are due ten (10) days after filing of the respective motions. Replies, not to exceed five double-spaced pages per brief, are due on the earlier of seven (7) days after responsive briefs are filed or December 21, 2015. The parties are encouraged to file briefs ahead of the respective deadlines. All motions in limine, not to exceed 15 double-spaced pages per brief, must be submitted no later than December 4, 2015, as further set forth in this order. Responses, not to exceed 15 double-spaced pages per brief, are due ten (10) days after the filing deadlines for the respective motions. Replies, not to exceed five double-spaced pages, are due on the earlier date of either seven (7) days after responsive briefs are filed or December 21, 2015. The parties are encouraged to file motions and briefs ahead of the respective deadlines. Joint Proposed Pretrial Order due by 12/8/2015. To the extent not explicitly modified herein, Order No. 50 and the Court's Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases and Rules and Procedures for Trials remain in full force and effect. The Court may enter additional and/or modified orders regarding the pretrial schedule of MDL Bellwether Trial #1 as circumstances require. The Court will issue one or more additional Orders scheduling the pretrial deadlines and dates for the remaining Early Trial Cases. (Motions due by 12/4/2015. Responses due by 12/1/2015. Replies due by 12/21/2015.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 9/10/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
September 10, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 84 ORDER NO. 77 [Regarding the August 28, 2015 Status Conference]: the Court will conduct additional Status Conferences on the following dates: Friday, October 9, 2015; Friday, November 20, 2015; and Friday, December 18, 2015. Further, unless the Court orders or indicates otherwise, all Status Conferences will begin at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time and will be held in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. In light of the Second Circuit's September 9, 2015 Order accepting a direct appeal of the Bankruptcy Court's Judgment on New GMs Motions to Enforce, the parties are directed to make a motion for expedited appeal. The parties are also to keep the Court apprised regarding Bankruptcy proceedings that implicate the bellwether complaints. The deposition of New GMs counsel, Mr. Anton Valukas, may proceed on September 24, 2015, consistent with the Courts comments at the Status Conference. The deposition of Mr. Valukas shall be limited to no more than three hours, unless Plaintiffs make a detailed showing demonstrating a need for more time by Friday, September 11, 2015. Plaintiffs may make this showing on an ex parte basis if doing so would require revealing deposition or trial strategy, although the Court encourages the Plaintiffs to make any such filing public, if at all and to the extent possible. To the extent Plaintiffs make such a public or redacted filing, New GM has until Wednesday, September 16, 2015 to file any response. The Court modifies its August 28, 2015 Memo Endorsement (Docket No. 1301) regarding bellwether expert discovery deadlines as follows: Plaintiffs will present their experts for deposition no later than Friday, October 2, 2015; New GM will disclose expert witnesses and submit any reports required under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) no later than Friday, October 9, 2015; New GM will present its experts for deposition no later than Friday, November 20, 2015. The parties should submit any agreed upon proposed order regarding the Phase Three Discovery Plan by Friday, October 2, 2015. Unless the Court orders otherwise, within seven (7) days of the Court ruling on the substance of any dispute wherein any party has filed a motion to temporarily seal (and regardless of whether the Court has granted the motion to temporarily seal), any party who believes that the materials should remain under seal or in redacted form shall file a letter brief regarding the propriety of doing so in light of the presumption in favor of public access to judicial documents, and as further set forth in this order. (Status Conference set for 10/9/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 11/20/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 12/18/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (Deposition due by 11/20/2015.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 9/10/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
August 28, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 83 Vacated with respect to James Kirk Solomon's claims, as per Judge's Order dated 2/3/2016, Doc. # 2230 ORDER NO. 76 in case 2:14-cv-02458-JMF; granting (1234) Motion to Dismiss in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. On August 7, 2015 New GM filed a motion to dismiss, without prejudice, the claims of several personal injury and wrongful death plaintiffs ("Plaintiffs") who had failed to submit substantially complete plaintiff fact sheets ("PFSs") as required by Order No. 25. (14-MD-2543 Docket No. 1234). Pursuant to that Order, Plaintiffs had fourteen days until August 21, 2015 to file responses either certifying submission of a completed PFS or opposing New GM's motion for other reasons. (14-MD-2543 Docket No. 422). New GM filed a reply on August 28, 2015, naming Plaintiffs who failed to submit any response within the required time period. (14-MD-2543 Docket No. 1302). (A list of those Plaintiffs is attached to this Order as Exhibit A.) In light of Plaintiffs' continued failure to submit substantially complete PFSs as required by Order No. 25, the claims of Plaintiffs on Exhibit A are hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. Should any Plaintiff submit all required documentation within the next thirty days, or otherwise have a basis to contest this dismissal, he or she may move to vacate the dismissal pursuant to Paragraph 25 of Order No. 25. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 1234. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/28/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (kl) Modified on 2/3/2016 (tn).
August 28, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 82 ORDER NO. 75: Unless and until the Court orders otherwise, the Early Trial Cases (see Order No. 25 (14-MD-2543 Docket No. 422)) will be tried on the following schedule: Trial One shall take place between January 11, 2016 and February 5, 2016; Trial Two shall take place between March 14, 2016 and April 1, 2016; Trial Three shall take place between May 2, 2016 and May 20, 2016; Trial Four shall take place between July 25, 2016 and August 12, 2016; Trial Five shall take place between September 12, 2016 and September 30, 2016; and Trial Six shall take place between November 14, 2016 and December 2, 2016. Counsel shall promptly advise the Court of any conflicts or reason to change those dates. Furthermore, counsel shall meet and confer with respect to a proposed order setting standard pretrial deadlines for all of these trials (for the submission of a joint pretrial order, dispositive motions, Daubert motions, in limine motions, requests to charge, proposed voir dire, and the like). Counsel should consult the Court's Individual Rules and Practices for Civil Cases for guidance on the relevant submissions. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/28/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
August 25, 2015 Filing 81 RESPONSE in Opposition to Motion re: (1247 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff Berenice Summerville Without Prejudice for Failure to Submit Discovery Required by MDL Order No. 45. . Document filed by Berenice Summerville. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Peller, Gary)
August 25, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 80 ORDER NO. 74 [Regarding Discovery of Expert Witness-Related Materials]: For purposes of this Order, "Consideration Materials" refers to any facts, data, information, or other materials that are considered or relied upon by an expert in forming opinions and required to be identified in the expert's report in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B), as further set forth in this order. The parties shall produce any non-public and previously unproduced Consideration Materials ("Unproduced Consideration Materials"). The parties shall also produce the following additional materials from the expert witness's files ("Expert Witness File Materials"), as further set forth in this order. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the parties shall produce Unproduced Consideration Materials and Expert Witness File Materials no later than fifteen (15) days before the date of the expert's deposition. The parties are not required to produce or exchange privilege logs for any materials withheld pursuant to this Order, including, but not limited to, drafts of expert reports, expert notes, or expert communications. The parties agree that a deposition notice shall be sufficient to require any witness designated as a testifying expert to appear for a deposition. Absent good cause shown, no subpoena shall be served on a testifying expert, and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/25/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn)
August 7, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 79 ORDER NO. 72 [Amending Procedures for Motions to Dismiss and Motions to Vacate Dismissal Brought Pursuant to Order Nos. 25 and 45]: that both Orders are AMENDED to add the following provisions: If any Plaintiff files a response to a motion to dismiss his or her claims without prejudice pursuant to the terms of either Order (Order No. 25 paragraph 24; Order No. 45 paragrpah 3), New GM shall file a reply, no later than seven days following the deadline for objections to New GM's motion, indicating which Plaintiffs' claims (if any) it still moves to dismiss. If any Plaintiff files a motion to vacate the dismissal of his or her claims (Order No. 25 paragraph 25; Order No. 45 paragraph 4), New GM shall file a consolidated opposition to any motions arising out of the same dismissal without prejudice two weeks after those plaintiffs' deadline for submitting such motions (thirty days after the Court granted the motion to dismiss). Each Plaintiff's reply, if any, shall be due one week thereafter. If the Court denies any Plaintiff's motion, New GM may move for dismissal with prejudice at any point thereafter. If New GM files a motion to dismiss with prejudice (Order No. 25 paragraph 25; Order No. 45 paragraph 4), any opposition shall be filed two weeks after the motion's filing. New GM's reply, if any, shall be filed one week thereafter. Counsel is advised to file all documents related to motions to dismiss pursuant to Order Nos. 25 and 45 in 14-MD-2543 and to "spread" the filings to any relevant individual member case or cases. Finally, in bringing any future motions to dismiss pursuant to Order Nos. 25 or 45, and in order to ensure that counsel in member cases are adequately advised of these amendments, New GM shall include a reference to this Order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/7/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn) Modified on 8/7/2015 (tn).
August 7, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 78 ORDER NO. 71 [Regarding the Disclosure of Non-Confidential Pretrial Discovery Materials and Amendment to Order No. 10 to Protect the Privacy Interests of Third Parties]: In order to protect "deposition testimony or information contained in personnel files - information that could be used to embarrass, harass, or violate the privacy interests of third parties to this litigation" (id. at 11), Order No. 10 is hereby amended to explicitly allow personnel files and/or personally sensitive employment-related information not already in the public domain to be treated as "Confidential" under Order No. 10, including but not limited to: ratings, salary, comments on performance, and employees' testimony regarding performance of other current or former employees ("Employment-Related Material"). In addition, in order to protect the "interests of non-parties - including current and former New GM employees already deposed in this litigation - in avoiding embarrassment, harassment, and invasions of privacy," which the Court ruled "are weighty enough to justify some restrictions on the dissemination of discovery" (id. at 10), prior to public disclosure of any deposition testimony or documents which have not been designated as Confidential or Highly Confidential by any party under Order No. 10 (14-MD-2543 Docket No. 294) (including reference to the substance of such testimony or documents), Plaintiffs must provide counsel for defendants and the deponent's individual counsel, if applicable, five (5) days' written notice and the opportunity to object to such disclosure on the grounds that the deposition testimony or documents contain Employment-Related Material or other personally sensitive, non-public information that could be used to embarrass, harass, or violate the privacy interests of non-parties and third parties to this litigation ("Personally Sensitive Material"). The process for Plaintiffs to challenge any such objection shall be the same as the process for challenging the designation of Confidential Material and Highly Confidential Material set forth in Paragraph 4 of Order No. 10. The Court may enter additional and/or modified protective orders regarding the disclosure of pretrial discovery materials as circumstances require. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/7/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
July 24, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 77 OPINION & ORDER re: (1058 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION for Protective Order Regarding Pretrial Discovery Materials filed by General Motors LLC: The Second Circuit has cautioned that Rule 26 is "not a blanket authorization for the court to prohibit disclosure of information whenever it deems it advisable to do so, but is rather a grant of power to impose conditions on discovery in order to prevent injury, harassment, or abuse of the court's processes." Bridge C.A.T. Scan Assocs. v. Technicare Corp., 710 F.2d 940, 944-45 (2d Cir. 1983) (emphasis omitted). Here, for the reasons stated above, the Court concludes that the order proposed by New GM would go well beyond protecting those interests and that more narrowly tailored orders - limited to protecting the interests of third parties and adopting Rule 3.6 of the New York State Rules of Professional Conduct - would more appropriately balance the interests at stake, including the interests of third parties in avoiding injury, harassment, and invasions of privacy; the interests of the press and the public in the subject matter of this MDL; and the interests of the parties in fair proceedings and trials. Accordingly, New GM's motion is granted in part and denied in part. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 1058, and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/24/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
July 15, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 76 ORDER NO. 70 [Regarding Discovery Disputes With Respect to Plaintiffs' Second Set of Consolidated Requests for Production of Documents]: that the Court makes the following rulings with respect to the disputed requests: the Second Set of Requests shall encompass documents generated through the date of this Order; (subpoenas and document requests New GM received from U.S. Government entities; documents related to the negotiation and resolution of the Government's claims; and documents related to scheduling witness interviews with the Government or, alternatively, the names of witnesses interviewed by Government entities): Plaintiffs' request for production of these documents is DENIED. New GM is ordered to produce requested documents related to the Feinberg Protocol (to the extent that there is no other basis to avoid disclosure, such as privilege). The Court agrees that materials related to the May 14, 2014 NHTSA consent order are relevant and discoverable, and thus orders New GM to produce the requested documents. To the extent New GM believes that "certain documents... are protected from disclosure" (14-MD-2543 Docket No. 1119, at 5) - for example, as settlement negotiations - it may object to disclosure of those documents, but that is not a valid basis to withhold the documents on a categorical basis, and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/15/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
July 13, 2015 Filing 75 NOTICE of Notice of Compliance with Discovery Requests re: (1035 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) Notice (Other). Document filed by Joanne Yearwood. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Peller, Gary)
July 13, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 74 ORDER NO. 69 [Regarding MDL Discovery Coordination Obligation of All Plaintiffs' Counsel]: Discovery with respect to issues of fact or law common to this MDL is to be conducted solely as part of these MDL proceedings, irrespective of whether the allegations and/or claims relevant to those common issues of fact or law are included in the Consolidated Complaints. Plaintiffs' counsel in each and every complaint (hereafter, "individual Plaintiffs' counsel") are hereby put on notice that they are required to coordinate discovery with Lead Counsel such that all discovery relevant to any common allegation and/or claim is pursued in the MDL or otherwise waived and barred, unless such discovery is strictly unique to the individual action. See Order No. 51 (14-MD-2543 Docket No. 918) VII); 04/24/15 Status Conference Tr. 27 - 294. To the extent any individual Plaintiffs' counsel wishes to propound any discovery not already propounded by Lead Counsel, they shall provide such discovery to Lead Counsel by October 9, 2015. To ensure that Plaintiffs' counsel in every member case is on notice of the provisions in this Order, New GM is directed to a) serve (either electronically or by other means) a copy of this Order on counsel in any action transferred to or directly filed in the MDL after the date of this Order and b) promptly file proof of such service on the docket of each member case (not in 14-MD-2543 or 14-MC-2543), and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/10/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn)
July 13, 2015 Filing 73 NOTICE of Elliott, Sesay and Bledsoe Plaintiffs' Objections to Dismissal Pursuant to Order No. 63 re: (1091 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) Order,,,. Document filed by Celestine Elliott. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Peller, Gary)
July 9, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 72 ORDER NO. 68 in case 2:14-cv-02458-JMF; granting (1047) Motion to Dismiss in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. In light of Plaintiffs' continue failure to submit substantially complete PFSs as required by Order No. 25, the claims of Plaintiffs on Exhibit A are hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. Should any Plaintiff submit all required documentation within the next thirty days, or otherwise context this dismissal, he or she may move to vacate the dismissal pursuant to Paragraph 25 of Order No. 25. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 1047. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/9/2015) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tro)
July 9, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 71 ORDER in case 2:14-cv-02458-JMF; granting (1124) Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. Application GRANTED. The September 21st conference is CANCELLED, and the October 23rd conference is RESCHEDULED to October 9, 2015. Counsel shall update the MDL website accordingly. The Clerk of Court is directed to docket this endorsed letter in 14-MD-2543, 14-MC-2543, and all member cases; and to terminate 14-MD-2543, Docket No. 1124. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/9/2015) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tro)
July 8, 2015 Filing 70 FILING ERROR - DUPLICATE DOCUMENT - NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Tami Scarola Stark on behalf of King & Spalding LLP. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Stark, Tami) Modified on 7/10/2015 (db).
July 8, 2015 Filing 69 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Tami Scarola Stark on behalf of King & Spalding LLP. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Stark, Tami)
July 8, 2015 Filing 68 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Tai Hyun Park on behalf of King & Spalding LLP. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Park, Tai)
July 6, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 67 ORDER NO. 67: that any other such motions with respect to Order No. 61, filed on June 29, 2015, must be filed no later than July 13, 2015. Any party wishing to oppose a motion or motions filed pursuant to the preceding paragraph shall file one consolidated opposition no later than two weeks after the deadline for the motions' submission under Order No. 50 (in this instance, July 27, 2015). Any replies shall be filed one week thereafter, no later than August 3, 2015. The same deadlines for motion practice shall apply to any future motion to reinstate filed pursuant to Order No. 50, and as further set forth in this order. (Motions due by 7/13/2015. Responses due by 7/27/2015. Replies due by 8/3/2015.) Set Deadlines/Hearing as to (1097 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 39 in 1:15-cv-02708-JMF) FIRST MOTION for Reconsideration re; (1089 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 35 in 1:15-cv-02708-JMF) Order of Dismissal: Responses due by 7/27/2015, Replies due by 8/3/2015. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/2/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn)
July 1, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 66 ORDER NO. 66: In light of the foregoing, the claims of Plaintiffs Nykea Fox and Courtney Williams are hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. See In re World Trade Ctr. Disaster Site Litig., 722 F.3d at 487 (holding "that the court did not exceed the bounds of its discretion in dismissing the noncompliant plaintiffs' complaints"). Additionally, because Fox and Williams may not be the only Plaintiffs who were named in the first Consolidated Complaints to be dropped from the SACC, Lead Counsel is directed to submit a letter, no later than July 8, 2015, (1) identifying any other Plaintiffs who appear only in the Pre-Sale or Post-Sale Consolidated Complaint, not in any individual action, and who were not named in the SACC; and (2) indicating whether they have any objection to the Clerk of Court terminating such Plaintiffs as parties in this action. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Nykea Fox and Courtney Williams as Plaintiffs in this action and to terminate 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 1023. Nykea Fox and Courtney Williams terminated. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/1/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
July 1, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 65 ORDER NO. 65: In light of Plaintiffs' continued failure to submit substantially complete PFSs as required by Order No. 25 - a fact which none of the Plaintiffs New GM now moves to dismiss appear to dispute - the claims of Plaintiffs on Exhibit A are hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. Should Ms. Bacon (or any Plaintiff on this list, for that matter) submit all required documentation within the next thirty days, or otherwise contest this dismissal, he or she may move to vacate the dismissal pursuant to Paragraph 25 of Order No. 25. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 984. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/30/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
June 30, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 64 ORDER NO. 64 [Regarding the Parties' Proposed Order Governing Obligations to Pursue Common Discovery in this MDL]: that the Court has amended the proposed order (a draft of which is attached as Exhibit A) to address all cases in this MDL. Because the Court's changes expand the number of cases that the order implicates (and because, among other things, the proposed order indicates that the parties "consent[] to its entry," Ex. A at 2), the Court believes that counsel should have an opportunity to review and comment on the new proposed order before its entry. Accordingly, if any party (including, but not limited to, Lead Counsel and New GM) objects to entry of the proposed order in its current form - or has any suggestions for revising it - it shall so advise the Court by letter no later than July 6, 2015. In the absence of any such objection (or suggestions), the Court will enter the order as proposed. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/30/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
June 29, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 63 ORDER NO. 63 [Regarding the Identification of Factual Predicates and Legal Claims in Any Individual Economic Loss Complaints that Are Not Included in the Second Amended Consolidated Complaint Pursuant to Order No. 51]: that pursuant to Order Nos. 50 and 61, the claims of certain Plaintiffs included on the attached list - in particular, those whose economic loss claims and/or allegations were not already dismissed pursuant to Order No. 29 - will be dismissed without prejudice. As with Order No. 61, Plaintiffs in underlying economic loss complaints have fourteen (14) days from entry of this Order to object to their inclusion on the attached Exhibit A. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/29/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
June 29, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 62 ORDER NO. 62 [Timing of Motion Practice On Unique Economic Loss Claims in Reinstated Economic Loss Cases]: The Court, having considered the parties' proposal, hereby ORDERS that motion practice on unique economic loss claims and allegations in reinstated economic loss complaints shall be deferred until after class certification, unless plaintiffs in any reinstated economic loss complaint files an objection within fourteen (14) days and makes a showing of good cause as to why Lead Counsel and New GM's proposal should not be adopted. For any plaintiff whose economic loss complaint is reinstated pursuant to Order No. 50 Paragraph 7 after the date of this Order, such plaintiff has fourteen (14) days from the date their economic loss complaint is reinstated to file an objection and make a showing of good cause as to why Lead Counsel and New GM's proposal should not be adopted as to their complaints. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/29/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
June 29, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 61 ORDER NO. 61 [Dismissal of Economic Loss Claims Without Prejudice Pursuant to Order No. 50]: The Court, having considered the parties' proposed order, hereby dismisses without prejudice those economic loss complaints and economic loss claims and/or allegations identified in the attached Exhibit A. Plaintiffs in any of the cases identified in the attached Exhibit A have fourteen (14) days from entry of this Order to seek to reinstate their complaints, economic loss claims and/or allegations, upon a showing of good cause, and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/29/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
June 29, 2015 Filing 60 NOTICE OF FILING OF OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT Notice is hereby given that an official transcript of a conference proceeding held on 6/16/2015 has been filed by the court reporter/transcriber in the above-captioned matter. The parties have seven (7) calendar days to file with the court a Notice of Intent to Request Redaction of this transcript. If no such Notice is filed, the transcript may be made remotely electronically available to the public without redaction after 90 calendar days...Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(McGuirk, Kelly)
June 29, 2015 Filing 59 TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings re: conference held on 6/16/2015 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Court Reporter/Transcriber: Thomas Murray, (212) 805-0300. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Redaction Request due 7/23/2015. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 8/3/2015. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 10/1/2015.Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(McGuirk, Kelly)
June 26, 2015 Filing 58 NOTICE of Elliott Sesay and Bledsoe Plaintiffs' Objections. Document filed by Celestine Elliott. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Peller, Gary)
June 23, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 57 ORDER NO. 60 [Regarding the June 16, 2015 Status Conference]: the Court will conduct additional Status Conferences on the following dates: Friday, August 28, 2015; Monday, September 21, 2015; Friday, October 23, 2015; and Friday, November 20, 2015. Further, unless the Court orders or indicates otherwise, all Status Conferences will begin at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time and will be held in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. In light of Magistrate Judge Dolinger's retirement, the Court has re-designated all MDL cases to Magistrate Judge James Cott. As such, any order that references Judge Dolinger (see, e.g., Order No. 36 65, 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 604) is hereby amended to refer instead to Magistrate Judge Cott. The parties are to meet and confer regarding the redactions in the amended consolidated complaint (14-MD-2543 Docket No. 1038), and any corrected versions thereof, and plaintiffs' motion to compel King & Spalding documents (14-MD-2543 Docket No. 1028), along with any exhibits to the motion to compel submitted under seal. To the extent any party believes that any of the foregoing documents should remain redacted or under seal, that party shall file a letter brief (not to exceed ten single-spaced pages) by Tuesday, June 30, 2015, explaining why the redaction or sealing is consistent with the presumption in favor of public access to judicial documents. The parties are to meet and confer and submit an agreed upon proposed order or competing letter briefs (not to exceed five single-spaced pages) addressing the timing and scope of motion practice on the amended consolidated complaint by Tuesday, June 30, 2015. The parties are to meet and confer and submit agreed upon proposed orders or competing letter briefs by Tuesday, June 23, 2015, on the following topics as further set forth in this order. The parties should continue to meet and confer regarding issues related to the deposition of New GM's outside counsel, Anton Valukas. The parties are to submit simultaneous letter briefs (not to exceed ten single-spaced pages) regarding any remaining disputes by Friday, July 17, 2015, and any reply briefs (not to exceed five single-spaced pages) should be filed by Friday, July 24, 2015. Pursuant to Order No. 25 Paragraph 49, on July 15, 2015, the parties shall submit letter briefs, not to exceed ten single-spaced pages, "proposing the order of [Early Trial Cases] and setting forth the parties' rationales for their proposed orders." The parties' letter briefs should principally address why - and how - the Early Trial Cases they seek to try first are representative of cases in the MDL as a whole. New GM is to submit a brief (not to exceed twenty double-spaced pages) regarding the treatment of non-confidential discovery material by Friday, June 19, 2015. Plaintiffs are to submit a response brief (not to exceed the twenty double-spaced pages) by Wednesday, June 24, 2015. The parties are to inform the Court of their views regarding the Hammatt Plaintiffs' notice of voluntary dismissal or of any proposal to address the notice by Tuesday, June 23, 2015. (Status Conference set for 8/28/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 9/21/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 10/23/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 11/20/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (Brief due by 7/17/2015. Responses to Brief due by 7/24/2015) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/22/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
June 18, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 56 ORDER NO. 59: To enable the Court to resolve whether the relevant Plaintiff's certifications are "false or incorrect," thus warranting dismissal of their claims despite their certifications to the contrary, any Plaintiff who submitted an opposition to New GM's motion to dismiss is granted leave to file a sur-reply, to be filed no later than June 26, 2015, responding to the alleged deficiencies in his or her PFS identified in New GM's reply. Counsel for any such Plaintiff is directed to confer with counsel for New GM in advance of filing such a sur-reply, so that Plaintiff is aware of the specific documents he or she is allegedly missing and can respond accordingly. Plaintiffs are warned that a failure to file any sur-reply may, pursuant to Order No. 25, result in dismissal (without prejudice) of their claims without further notice. SO ORDERED. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Surreplies due by 6/26/2015.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/18/2015) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ajs) Modified on 6/19/2015 (ajs).
June 15, 2015 NOTICE OF REDESIGNATION TO ANOTHER MAGISTRATE JUDGE. The above entitled action has been redesignated to Magistrate Judge James L. Cott. Please note that this is a reassignment of the designation only. (sjo)
June 11, 2015 Set/Reset Deadlines as to (984 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs with Overdue Discovery Pursuant to Order No. 25: Replies due by 6/16/2015. Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
June 11, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 55 ORDER NO. 58 [Regarding New GM's May 26, 2015 Motion To Dismiss Without Prejudice and its June 10, 2015 Motion To Dismiss With Prejudice]: that New GM is directed to file a reply to Plaintiffs' oppositions, no later than June 16, 2015, with an updated list of Plaintiffs whose claims New GM is still seeking to dismiss (along with a notation indicating if any of those plaintiffs opposed New GM's motion). Nykea Fox and Cortney Williams, identified on Exhibit A of New GM's motion - are directed to file any opposition to New GM's motion no later than June 25, 2015. New GM's reply, if any, shall be filed no later than July 2, 2015. Set Deadlines/Hearing as to (1023 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION to Dismiss with Prejudice Economic Loss Plaintiffs for Failure to Submit Discovery Required by MDL Order No. 45: Responses due by 6/25/2015, Replies due by 7/2/2015. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/11/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn) Modified on 6/11/2015 (tn).
June 10, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 54 OPINION AND ORDER: In complex, multidistrict litigation of this sort, courts must grapple with - indeed, juggle a host of challenges and considerations. Among the most important of those challenges and considerations is striking the right balance between, on the one hand, protecting and preserving the rights and interests of individual litigants while, on the other hand, ensuring that such solicitude does not undermine the central purpose of MDL consolidation - namely, promoting "just and efficient" resolution of the parties' disputes. 28 U.S.C. 1407(a). In its effort to streamline the litigation, the Court's initial order addressing the effect of the Consolidated Complaints in this MDL - Order No. 29 - failed to grant appropriate weight to the former concern. For the reasons stated above, however, the Court concludes that Order No. 50 - a copy of which is attached for ease of reference does strike the right balance. As noted, Order No. 50 contemplates entry of additional orders touching on these issues. Through those orders and others, the Court will undoubtedly refine the balance between the individual and collective even further. For now, however, the Court finds that Order No. 50 appropriately protects the interests of all individual parties while ensuring that the Court is able to "expeditiously and thoroughly resolve" the common legal and factual issues that motivated the JPML to transfer these cases here. In re Asbestos Cases of Hatch, James & Dodge, G. Patterson Keahey, No. 06-CV-741 (TS), 2007 WL 582983, at *2 (D. Utah Feb. 20, 2007). (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/10/2015) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(kl)
June 1, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 53 ORDER NO. 57 [Amending the Deposition Cross-Noticing Requirements in Order No. 36]: that case-specific bellwether depositions (i.e., depositions of case-specific expert witnesses or witnesses designated pursuant to Order No. 43 (Docket No. 744) as Category 3, Category 4, Category 5, and Category 6 fact witnesses) do not need to be cross-noticed in the Coordinated Actions. Accordingly, the first two sentences of Paragraph 20 of the Amended Deposition Protocol Order (Order No. 36, Docket No. 604) are amended as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/1/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
May 28, 2015 Filing 52 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Jeffrey J Cox on behalf of General Motors LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Schedule A)Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Cox, Jeffrey)
May 27, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 51 ORDER NO. 56. The claims of Plaintiffs named in Exhibit 1 are hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. See In re World Trade Ctr. Disaster Site Litig., 722 F.3d 483, 487 (2d Cir. 2013) (noting that district courts' "responsibility to manage their dockets so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases...is particularly acute where the litigation is complex and continuing," and concluding "that the court did not exceed the bounds of its discretion in dismissing the noncompliant plaintiffs' complaints" (internal quotation marks omitted)). The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Plaintiffs named on Exhibit 1 and to terminate 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 898. Additionally, since the claims of Steven Jones will be terminated pursuant to this Order, and he is the only Plaintiff in 14-CV-5350 (Ishmail Sesay, Plaintiff in 14-CV-6018, appears to be listed on the docket in error), the Clerk of Court is directed to close that case. Granting (898) Motion to Dismiss in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/27/2015) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md 02543-JMF et al. (rjm)
May 20, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 50 NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i): that pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), the claims of Plaintiff Ryan Charles Smith, against Defendants General Motors LLC and General Motors Holding LLC, may be dismissed with prejudice and without need of a court order. SO ORDERED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close 15-CV-764. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/19/2015) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 1:15-cv-00764-JMF(tn)
May 11, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 49 ORDER NO. 55 granting (865) Motion to Dismiss in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF: that New GM's motion to dismiss, without prejudice, the claims of Nykea Fox and Courtney Williams is GRANTED. The Court notes that if Plaintiffs do, in fact, submit all required documentation within the next thirty days, they can move to vacate the dismissal without prejudice pursuant to Paragraph 4 of the Order. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 865. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/11/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn) Modified on 5/11/2015 (tn).
May 6, 2015 Set/Reset Deadlines as to (898 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION to Dismiss With Prejudice Plaintiffs With Overdue Discovery: Responses due by 5/19/2015, Replies due by 5/29/2015. Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
May 6, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 48 ORDER NO. 53 [Regarding Lead Counsel's April 22, 2015 Motion to Vacate Dismissal and New GM's April 29, 2015 Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice] in case 2:14-cv-02458-JMF; granting (860) Motion to Vacate in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF: Because Plaintiffs listed on Exhibit A to Lead Counsel's motion have certified that they have all submitted a substantially complete PFS (see 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 861 at 2 & Ex. A), Lead Counsel's motion to vacate the dismissal with respect to those Plaintiffs is GRANTED pursuant to Order No. 25, and their cases are hereby reinstated. This Order, however, is without prejudice to New GM filing a motion to dismiss with respect to any such plaintiffs whose PFS submission is later deemed to have been incomplete as of the date of the motion's filing. As for New GM's motion to dismiss with prejudice, any opposition (by Lead Counsel or by any individual Plaintiff that it is a subject of that motion) shall be filed no later than May 19, 2015. Failure to submit any opposition to New GM's motion may result in dismissal with prejudice of that Plaintiff's claims without further notice. New GM's reply, if any, shall be filed no later than May 29, 2015. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 860. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/5/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn)
May 4, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 47 ORDER NO. 52 -- Regarding Qualification of Documents Generated by a Party as Authentic or Business Records: For the reasons set forth within, the Court finds that the entry of an order similar to the order used in the Bextra & Celebrex MDL will help to ensure that no party waits until close of discovery or eve of trial to raise objections, which is essential in litigation of this complexity and size and crucial for purposes of minimizing the risk of delays in the schedule set by the Court, including the schedule for bellwether trials. (SEE ORDER.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/4/2015) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (ab)
May 1, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 46 ORDER NO. 51 [Regarding the April 24, 2015 Status Conference]: Status Conference set for 6/16/2015 (rescheduled from the previously scheduled date of June 26, 2015) at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 8/28/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. The parties should advise the Court as to whether they have reached agreement regarding informal coordination with counsel in the Felix Related Action (see 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 770) and the details of the proposed agreement (if any). If the parties do not reach agreement, they should promptly inform the Court. The parties should continue to meet and confer regarding the data extraction issues related to New GM's Customer Assistance Center ("CAC") Service Request database identified in the parties' joint pre-conference letter (14-MD-2543 Docket No. 847, 2) and shall raise any outstanding disagreements at the June 16, 2015 Status Conference. The parties should continue to meet and confer regarding production of documents that New GM has produced to the U.S. government and promptly bring any unresolved issues to the Court's attention. For Request Nos. 2, 4(c), 8, 15, 16, 24, 33, 34, and 41, New GM shall search for potentially responsive documents by applying the search terms agreed to by the parties across the custodial files of the custodians listed in Exhibit 4 to New GM's letter brief (14-MD-2543 Docket No 857, Ex. 4). The parties should meet and confer as to whether this list of deponents should be supplemented with additional individuals reasonably targeted by plaintiffs to have responsive information, including but not limited to additional deponents noticed by Lead Counsel. The parties should also meet and confer regarding reasonable production deadlines for any such additional agreed upon custodians. The deadline for Lead Counsel to file Plaintiffs' amended consolidated complaint has been extended to Friday, June 12, 2015. (Amended Pleadings due by 6/12/2015.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/30/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
April 27, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 45 PRESERVATION ORDER NO. 7 AGREED UPON ORDER REGARDING THE INSPECTION OF CERTAIN IGNITION SWITCH PARTS GOVERNED BY NHTSA RECALL CAMPAIGN 14v-047000: This Order sets forth an agreed plan for testing of certain recalled ignition switch parts covered by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ("NHTSA") Recall Campaign 14v-047000 and modifies New GM's obligations for maintaining and preserving those recalled ignition switch parts. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/27/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
April 27, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 44 AGREED PARTS PRESERVATION ORDER NO. 6: This Order sets forth New GM's obligations for maintaining and preserving recalled parts covered by (a) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ("NHTSA") Recall Campaigns 14V-092, 14V-246, 14V-251, 14V-259, 14V-265, 14V-298, 14V-299, 14V-339, 14V-342, 14V-345, 14V-346, 14V-375, 14V-377, 14V-394, 14V-404, 14V-417, 14V-451, 14V-300, 13V-615 and (b) field actions outlined in New GM Bulletin No. 14036 (Incorrect Safety Lock Switch), New GM Bulletin No. 14043 (Incorrect Transmission Thrust Bearing), New GM Bulletin No. 14047 (Tail Lamp Gasket Seal), New GM Bulletin No. 14076 (Engine Noise), New GM Bulletin No. 14166 (Seat Mounted Side Impact Airbag Connector). The NHTSA Recall Campaigns and New GM Field Actions covered by this Order will be referred to as the "Relevant Recall Campaigns" for purposes of this Order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/27/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
April 24, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 43 ORDER NO. 50 [Reconsidering and Amending Order No. 29 Regarding the Effect of the Consolidated Complaints]: the Court determines that Order No. 29 should be: (1) clarified to specify that all dismissals are, unless and until the Court orders otherwise, without prejudice; (2) modified to provide a procedure to allow certain economic loss plaintiffs not named in the amended Consolidated Complaints to challenge the dismissal of their claims; and (3) revised to protect the due process rights of economic loss plaintiffs, such that dismissal of their individual complaints in order to streamline these proceedings does not preclude such plaintiffs from (a) recovering as a member of any class that might be certified or (b) pursuing claims, should a plaintiff choose to do so, if no class is certified or if the plaintiff opts out of a class that is certified. Accordingly, this Order supersedes Order No. 29 in its entirety, except that Order No. 29 remains intact insofar as it dismissed, without prejudice, the allegations, claims, and defendant(s) included in complaints that already had been transferred to or were filed in MDL 2543 as of the date of entry of that Order and not included in the Consolidated Complaints, which complaints were listed in Order No. 29, Exhibit A; and as further set forth in this order. (See 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 477; see 6, infra). (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/24/2015) As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
April 21, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 42 ORDER NO. 49: On April 3, 2015, Lead Counsel (in conjunction with Gary Peller, counsel for Elliott, Sesay, and Bledsoe Plaintiffs) and New GM submitted competing proposed orders regarding the effect of the Consolidated Complaints and later amendments on individual complaints. (14-MD-2543 Docket Nos. 809 ("Lead Counsel Ltr."), 810 ("New GM Ltr.")). Having reviewed the parties' submissions, the Court has drafted its own proposed order (attached as Exhibit A), which incorporates the following preliminary views regarding the parties' substantive disputes as further set forth in this order. The parties should be prepared to discuss the proposed Order at the status conference scheduled for April 24, 2015. (Mr. Peller is welcome, but not required, to attend and be heard on these issues.) Further, to facilitate the discussion, Lead Counsel and counsel for New GM shall confer in advance of the conference about the proposed Order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/21/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
April 17, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 41 ORDER NO. 48 [Protecting Privileged Materials Under Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d)]: that the Produced Documents, including the substance and the content thereof, shall be subject to and governed by the terms of this Order ("Rule 502(d) Order" or "Order"), as set forth below. Unless otherwise stated in this Order, the Produced Documents, including the substance and content thereof, are also subject to the terms of MDL Order No. 10 (14-MD-2543 Docket No. 294) that was entered by the Court on September 10, 2014. The purpose of this Order is to expedite the flow of discovery material, and to facilitate prompt resolution of disputes over privilege, pursuant to the Court's inherent authority, its authority under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) and Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d), and judicial opinions interpreting such Rules. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/17/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
April 16, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 40 ORDER NO. 47: In Order No. 22, the Court directed the parties, "[w]ithin fourteen (14) days of the Bankruptcy Court's ruling on New GM's pending Motions to Enforce," to "submit a joint letter proposing how the Court should proceed with respect to" Plaintiffs' Pre-Sale Consolidated Complaint. (14-MD-2543 Docket No. 399). As the parties are presumably aware, the Bankruptcy Court issued its ruling yesterday. (See 09-BR-50026 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.) Docket No. 13109). Accordingly - and unless and until the Court orders otherwise - the parties are to submit their joint letter no later than April 29, 2015. Further, the parties should be prepared to discuss the issue at the upcoming April 24, 2015 status conference - preparation that should include, as necessary, conferring with counsel litigating before the Bankruptcy Court. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/16/2015) As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
April 6, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 39 ORDER NO. 46 [Governing Deposition Privilege Issues Under Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d)]: that the Privilege Issue testimony, including the substance and the content thereof, shall be subject to and governed by the terms of this Order ("Rule 502(d) Deposition Order" or "Order"), as set forth below. The purpose of this Order is to expedite the flow of discovery material, and to facilitate prompt resolution of disputes over privilege, pursuant to the Court's inherent authority, its authority under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) and Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d), and judicial opinions interpreting such Rules. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/6/2015) As per chambers, Filed In Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
April 1, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 38 ORDER: that, by April 6, 2015, New GM and Lead Counsel shall submit to the Clerk of Court checks payable to AT&T in the amount of $850 and $849, respectively. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 4/1/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
March 30, 2015 Filing 37 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Wendy D May on behalf of General Motors LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Schedule A)Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(May, Wendy)
March 30, 2015 Filing 36 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Pryce Godfrey Tucker on behalf of General Motors L.L.C.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Schedule A)Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Tucker, Pryce)
March 30, 2015 Filing 35 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Giovanna Tarantino Bingham on behalf of General Motors L.L.C.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Schedule A)Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Bingham, Giovanna)
March 30, 2015 Filing 34 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Kyle Harold Dreyer on behalf of General Motors L.L.C.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Schedule A)Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Dreyer, Kyle)
March 30, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 33 ORDER NO. 45 [Mechanism and Timetable For Dismissal of Economic Loss Plaintiffs With Overdue Discovery]: that any Plaintiff who fails to comply with his or her PFS obligations may be subject to having his or her claims dismissed. If a Plaintiff has not submitted a substantially complete PFS as of the date of this Order, the MDL Defendants shall send a Notice of Overdue Discovery to Plaintiff's counsel identifying the discovery overdue and stating that, unless the Plaintiff complies with the Court's discovery orders, the case may be subject to dismissal. If a Plaintiff fails to submit a completed PFS within fourteen (14) days after service of the Notice of Overdue Discovery, the MDL Defendants may move the Court for an Order dismissing the economic loss claims of the Plaintiff without prejudice. Plaintiff shall have fourteen (14) days from the date of the MDL Defendants' motion to dismiss to file a response either (a) certifying that the Plaintiff has submitted a completed PFS or (b) opposing the MDL Defendants' motion for other reasons. If a Plaintiff certifies that he or she has submitted a completed PFS, the Plaintiff's claims shall not be dismissed. The Court may, upon motion or sua sponte, dismiss the claims of any Plaintiff whom the Court finds to have submitted a false or incorrect certification. If the Court dismisses the economic loss claims of a Plaintiff without prejudice under the previous paragraph, the Order will be converted to a Dismissal With Prejudice upon the MDL Defendants' motion - to be filed no earlier than thirty (30) days after the Court's entry of the Order of Dismissal Without Prejudice - unless Plaintiff submits a substantially complete PFS or moves to vacate the Dismissal Without Prejudice within that same time period. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/30/2015) As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
March 27, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 32 ORDER NO. 44 -- Regarding Certain Discovery Disputes: The parties raised several outstanding discovery disputes including Phase Two Discovery custodial search terms (see Order No. 31 2(b)) and Plaintiffs' Consolidated Document Requests (see id. 6). Pursuant to Order No. 39 Section IV, the parties submitted letter briefs and competing proposals for the Court's consideration (see Docket Nos. 732 and 734), and Plaintiffs have submitted a supporting declaration from Thomas Matzen (Docket No. 733). SEE ORDER. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/27/2015) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(ab)
March 26, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 31 ORDER NO. 43 [Regarding Deposition Sequence And Examination Time]: The MDL Defendants and Lead Counsel for the MDL 2543 Plaintiffs were unable to reach agreement on a supplemental deposition protocol. The Court has considered the parties' positions, conferred with judges presiding over Coordinated Actions and other related actions, and now issues the following protocols regarding the allocation of examination time and sequencing for MDL fact witness depositions, as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/26/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
March 26, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 30 ORDER NO. 42 [Establishing Common Benefit Fee and Expense Fund]: The purpose of this Order is to provide for the fair and equitable sharing of the burden of services performed and expenses incurred by attorneys acting for the common benefit of plaintiffs in Common Benefit Actions (as defined in paragraph 11, below), and to provide plaintiffs in Common Benefit Actions and their counsel with access to Common Benefit Work Product for use in Common Benefit Actions, as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/26/2015) As per chambers, Filed in Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn)
March 24, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 29 Vacated-in-part as per Judge's Order dated 5/5/2015, (Doc. # 935 in case number 14md2543) ORDER NO. 41 granting in part and denying in part (625) Motion to Dismiss in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF: Accordingly, Lead Counsel and/or Plaintiffs' liaison counsel is directed to serve Ms. Robinett - if they have not done so already - with a copy of this Order, Order No. 25, New GM's Notice of Overdue Discovery (Docket No. 559), and New GM's motion to dismiss Ms. Robinett's claims (along with Lead Counsel's response and New GM's reply) no later than March 25, 2015, and to promptly file proof of such service on the dockets of both 14-MD-2543 and 14-CV-9466. Ms. Robinett shall file any objection to dismissal with this Court's Pro Se office no later than April 8, 2015; New GM's reply, if any, shall be filed (and served on Ms. Robinett) no later than April 13, 2015. Ms. Robinett is cautioned that failure to respond to New GM's motion (or to obtain an extension to do so) will result in dismissal without prejudice of her claims, and may result in dismissal with prejudice pursuant to the terms of Order No. 25. As part of this Court's inherent authority to manage its caseload, Ms. Robinett is directed to become an ECF user - and take all necessary steps to do so - no later than May 13, 2015. In order to assist Ms. Robinett in this regard, Lead Counsel and/or Plaintiffs' liaison counsel are further directed to mail a copy of the model Motion for Permission for Electronic Case Filing for pro se plaintiffs and a copy of "A Manual for Pro Se Litigants Appearing Before the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York"- both available on the Court's website - to Ms. Robinett, and to promptly file proof of such service on the docket of 14-CV-9466. In conclusion, and for the foregoing reasons, the claims of all plaintiffs appearing on Exhibit A of New GM's reply (Docket No. 672, Ex. A), with the exception of Ms. Robinett, are dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Order No. 25. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 625. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/23/2015) ***As per chambers, filed in all member cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn) Modified on 5/6/2015 (tn).
March 24, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 28 ORDER NO. 40 [Regarding Choice-of-Law for Certain Plaintiffs]: In accord with the Parties' stipulation and agreement, the Court orders that, with respect to all of the claims of each of the above-named 22 Plaintiffs who allege vehicles that were manufactured by New GM, the substantive laws of each Plaintiff's home jurisdiction will govern all of that Plaintiff's claims asserted in the Complaint. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/23/2015) ***As per chambers, filed in all member cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
March 19, 2015 Set/Reset Deadlines: Brief due by 3/27/2015. Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
March 19, 2015 Set/Reset Hearings: Status Conference set for 4/24/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 6/26/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Status Conference set for 8/28/2015 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman. Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
March 19, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 27 ORDER NO. 39 [Regarding the March 13, 2015 Status Conference] terminating (74) Motion for Reconsideration in case 2:14-cv-02458-JMF; terminating (74) Motion for Reconsideration in case 2:14-cv-02713-JMF; terminating (74) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-02714-JMF; terminating (74) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-03326-JMF; terminating (70) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-03298-JMF; terminating (499) Motion for Reconsideration ; granting (643) Motion to Seal Document in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF; terminating (103) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04226-JMF; terminating (87) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04265-JMF; terminating (123) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04267-JMF; terminating (114) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04268-JMF; terminating (88) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04270-JMF; terminating (116) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04272-JMF; terminating (87) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04273-JMF; terminating (81) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04338-JMF; terminating (113) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04339-JMF; terminating (74) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04340-JMF; terminating (142) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04342-JMF; terminating (88) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04345-JMF; terminating (94) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04346-JMF; terminating (81) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04348-JMF; terminating (81) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04350-JMF; terminating (85) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04630-JMF; terminating (79) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04632-JMF; terminating (73) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04637-JMF; terminating (75) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04641-JMF; terminating (81) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04650-JMF; terminating (72) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04661-JMF; terminating (76) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04662-JMF; terminating (73) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04667-JMF; terminating (74) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04672-JMF; terminating (78) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04676-JMF; terminating (73) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04684-JMF; terminating (69) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04686-JMF; terminating (82) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04690-JMF; terminating (88) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04691-JMF; terminating (89) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04692-JMF; terminating (76) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04685-JMF; terminating (96) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04699-JMF; terminating (93) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04701-JMF; terminating (82) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04702-JMF; terminating (80) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04704-JMF; terminating (84) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04707-JMF; terminating (72) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04714-JMF; terminating (89) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04715-JMF; terminating (86) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04717-JMF; terminating (77) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04720-JMF; terminating (97) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04727-JMF; terminating (75) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04731-JMF; terminating (80) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04732-JMF; terminating (80) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04738-JMF; terminating (81) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04741-JMF; terminating (112) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04751-JMF; terminating (83) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04752-JMF; terminating (81) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04754-JMF; terminating (81) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04755-JMF; terminating (100) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04756-JMF; terminating (75) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04758-JMF; terminating (67) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04759-JMF; terminating (67) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04760-JMF; terminating (73) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04764-JMF; terminating (75) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04768-JMF; terminating (78) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04771-JMF; terminating (91) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04775-JMF; terminating (73) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04778-JMF; terminating (68) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04781-JMF; terminating (72) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04784-JMF; terminating (76) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04798-JMF; terminating (78) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04799-JMF; terminating (67) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04801-JMF; terminating (75) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04802-JMF; terminating (80) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04804-JMF; terminating (89) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04808-JMF; terminating (73) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04810-JMF; terminating (78) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04811-JMF; terminating (68) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04857-JMF; terminating (69) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04858-JMF; terminating (76) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-04859-JMF; terminating (54) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05035-JMF; terminating (66) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05137-JMF; terminating (65) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05323-JMF; terminating (68) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05325-JMF; terminating (78) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05331-JMF; terminating (62) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05332-JMF; terminating (68) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05336-JMF; terminating (55) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05338-JMF; terminating (69) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05340-JMF; terminating (62) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05345-JMF; terminating (56) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05347-JMF; terminating (66) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05350-JMF; terminating (73) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05351-JMF; terminating (65) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05356-JMF; terminating (62) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05358-JMF; terminating (59) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05328-JMF; terminating (65) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05458-JMF; terminating (93) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05461-JMF; terminating (68) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05501-JMF; terminating (62) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05503-JMF; terminating (56) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05506-JMF; terminating (58) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05746-JMF; terminating (57) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05750-JMF; terminating (57) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05752-JMF; terminating (60) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05754-JMF; terminating (51) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05715-JMF; terminating (63) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05880-JMF; terminating (55) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05881-JMF; terminating (59) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05850-JMF; terminating (59) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-05810-JMF; terminating (54) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-06018-JMF; terminating (47) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-06830-JMF; terminating (45) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-06924-JMF; terminating (47) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-07224-JMF; terminating (40) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-07242-JMF; terminating (44) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-07474-JMF; terminating (45) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-07475-JMF; terminating (52) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-07477-JMF; terminating (46) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-07623-JMF; terminating (30) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-07631-JMF; terminating (34) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-07977-JMF; terminating (30) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-07979-JMF; terminating (41) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-08130-JMF; terminating (46) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-08133-JMF; terminating (38) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-08134-JMF; terminating (29) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-08176-JMF; terminating (42) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-08382-JMF; terminating (49) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-08385-JMF; terminating (48) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-08386-JMF; terminating (28) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-08317-JMF; terminating (23) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-08248-JMF; terminating (75) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-08540-JMF; terminating (23) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-08883-JMF; terminating (24) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-08885-JMF; terminating (42) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-08886-JMF; terminating (36) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-08891-JMF; terminating (59) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-09058-JMF; terminating (14) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-09110-JMF; terminating (22) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-09466-JMF; terminating (23) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-09469-JMF; terminating (13) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-09431-JMF; terminating (18) Motion for Reconsideration in case 1:14-cv-09712-JMF: that the Court will conduct additional Status Conferences on the following dates: Friday, April 24, 2015; Friday, June 26, 2015; and Friday, August 28, 2015. Unless the Court orders or indicates otherwise, all Status Conferences will begin at 9:30 a.m. EDT an
March 17, 2015 Filing 26 MEMO ENDORSEMENT denying (23) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney in case 1:15-cv-00764-JMF. ENDORSEMENT: Application DENIED without prejudice to renewal in accordance with Local Rule 1.4 (including service upon counsel's client). The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 15-CV-764 Docket No. 23. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/17/2015) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 1:15-cv-00764-JMF (tn)
March 11, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 25 ORDER NO. 38 [Regarding Preservation and Accessibility of Documents and Electronic Data]: Based on the agreement of the Parties, and for good cause shown, the Court enters this Order to address the scope of accessibility and preservation of Documents and Electronic Data in this matter. This Order supersedes the preservation provisions set forth in Order No. 1. See Order No. 1, XII. This Order does not, however, supersede Order No. 11 or the orders entered by the Court with respect to the preservation of tangible things. See, e.g., 14-MD-2543 Docket Nos. 238, 279, 344, 403. It is anticipated that additional orders may be entered with respect to other specified Documents, Electronic Data, and tangible things, which orders will supersede this Order to the extent they conflict with this Order. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/11/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
March 3, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER NO. 37 [Regarding Plaintiffs' Request to Compel Production of Unredacted Documents and To Amend Order No. 10] re: (600 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) Brief filed by GM Ignition Switch MDL Plaintiffs, (601 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) Brief filed by GM Ignition Switch MDL Plaintiffs: that Plaintiffs' request to compel production of unredacted versions of GM Board of Directors-related documents is DENIED as premature. The parties are directed to discuss, in good faith, their disputes regarding the redacted documents, and - if such a process is unsuccessful in resolving all of the disputes - are further directed to meet and confer regarding a process for submitting the challenged documents (or a representative subset thereof) for in camera review by the Court. Plaintiffs' request to amend Order No. 10, it is GRANTED to the limited extent that the Order appears to authorize redaction of "Highly Confidential Information" that is otherwise relevant and not independently protected from disclosure by one of the grounds listed in Paragraph 3(d). (14-MD-2543 Docket No. 294). Accordingly, the first sentence of Paragraph 3(d) of the Order is amended to state as further set forth in this order. To the extent Plaintiffs seek additional amendments to Order No. 10 - including but not limited to prohibiting all redactions of "Highly Confidential Information" - their motion is DENIED without prejudice to renewal upon good cause (based on, for example, a showing that a party is abusing and/or improperly applying the authorization to redact material). (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/3/2015) As per chambers, Filed In All Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
March 2, 2015 Filing 23 MOTION for Jeffrey A. Kaiser to Withdraw as Attorney . Document filed by Ryan Charles Smith. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Order Granting Motion to Withdraw)(De Llano, Rodrigo)
February 23, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 21 AGREED PRESERVATION ORDER NO. 5: This Order sets forth New GM's obligations for maintaining and preserving recalled parts covered by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ("NHTSA") Recall Campaigns 14V-240, 14V-253, 14V-315, 14V-341 (the "Relevant Recall Campaigns"). (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/19/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed in all Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
February 23, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 20 ORDER NO. 36 [AMENDED DEPOSITION PROTOCOL ORDER]: Although the Joint Coordination Order contains provisions relating to depositions in the MDL Proceeding and Coordinated Actions, the MDL Court directed the parties to meet and confer to develop more specific protocols. The Court has considered the parties' positions and now issues the following protocols to govern (1) all depositions in the MDL Proceeding and (2) all depositions involving common questions in the MDL Proceeding and Coordinated Actions. This Order does not address the timing of depositions, a subject that the Court has addressed in prior Orders and conferences (see, e.g., Order Nos. 14 and 25; Dec. 15, 2014 Status Conference Tr. at 63:16-21, 66:25-67:11, 67:17-18) and will address further in future Orders as appropriate, as further set forth in this order. The parties shall meet and confer to develop supplemental protocols for (a) allotting examination time to various parties or party groups and (b) determining order of examination of a witness. Unless the Court orders otherwise, the parties shall submit an agreed-upon proposed order (or orders), or competing proposed orders and supporting letter briefs not to exceed five (5) pages, no later than March 4, 2015. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/23/2015) ***As per chambers, Filed In all Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al. (tn)
February 23, 2015 Set/Reset Deadlines: Brief due by 3/4/2015. Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
February 17, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER NO. 35 [Classification System for "Severe" and "Mild to Moderate" Personal Injury Claims]: the Court established a bellwether trial plan for eligible personal injury and wrongful death claims based on alleged defects in vehicles manufactured by General Motors LLC or General Motors Corporation. (See Order No. 25.) The bellwether trial plan consists of claims from three categories, as further set forth in this order. After conferring, the parties agreed upon a classification system for such personal injury claims. After due consideration, the Court approves and adopts the parties' proposed classification of claims. For the bellwether trial plan for personal injury and wrongful death cases, a claim involving any of the following types of injuries shall be eligible for inclusion in Category 2: skeletal or bone fracture requiring surgery; spinal injury requiring surgery; traumatic brain injury resulting in a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 12 or lower; limb amputation; cut or laceration resulting in permanent and significant scars or disfigurement; second or third degree burns on more than 10 percent of the body; paraplegia; quadriplegia; blindness or vision impairment lasting for one week or more; brachial plexus injury; or nerve damage or other medically diagnosed injury that (a) prevents the injured person from performing substantially all of the material acts that constitute such person's usual and customary daily activities, or (b) results in the loss or limitation of a body function or system. A claim involving an injury other than one listed in Paragraph 3 shall be eligible for inclusion in Category 3. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/17/2015) ***As per chambers, filed in all Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
February 6, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER NO. 34 [Regarding the Bellwether Plan's Type of Alleged Defects and Categorization of Claims]: that ignition-switch related claims involving accidents occurring on or after July 11, 2009 in the following vehicles will be within the scope of the bellwether trial plan memorialized by Order No. 25: 1. Chevrolet Cobalt (MY 2005-2007); 2. Pontiac G5 (MY 2007); 3. Saturn Ion (MY 2003-2007); 4. Pontiac Solstice (MY 2006-2007); 5. Chevrolet HHR (MY 2006-2007); and 6. Saturn Sky (MY 2007). The pool of eligible cases will consist of claims from the following categories: 1. Category 1: Wrongful death claims involving Production Part Vehicles with airbag non-deployment. 2. Category 2: Severe personal injury claims involving Production Part Vehicles with airbag non-deployment; 3. Category 3: Mild to moderate personal injury claims involving Production Part Vehicles with airbag non-deployment. The parties shall meet and confer regarding the classification system for distinguishing between "severe" and "mild to moderate" personal injury claims, and to submit a joint proposed order no later than February 13, 2015. Additionally, the parties are directed to meet and confer as to whether (and, if so, when) the bellwether trial plan should be expanded to encompass other vehicle models and claims represented in the MDL, and to raise the issue with the Court via a pre-conference proposed agenda at the appropriate time. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/6/2015) As per chambers, Filed In all Member Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(tn)
February 5, 2015 Filing 18 MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: (49 in 1:14-cv-08385-JMF, 72 in 1:14-cv-04661-JMF, 74 in 2:14-cv-02713-JMF, 55 in 1:14-cv-05881-JMF, 62 in 1:14-cv-05358-JMF, 73 in 1:14-cv-04764-JMF, 80 in 1:14-cv-04804-JMF, 73 in 1:14-cv-05351-JMF, 76 in 1:14-cv-04798-JMF, 79 in 1:14-cv-04632-JMF, 74 in 2:14-cv-02458-JMF, 78 in 1:14-cv-05331-JMF, 54 in 1:14-cv-06018-JMF, 69 in 1:14-cv-05340-JMF, 65 in 1:14-cv-05356-JMF, 78 in 1:14-cv-04811-JMF, 42 in 1:14-cv-08886-JMF, 29 in 1:14-cv-08176-JMF, 42 in 1:14-cv-08382-JMF, 45 in 1:14-cv-06924-JMF, 89 in 1:14-cv-04692-JMF, 44 in 1:14-cv-07474-JMF, 40 in 1:14-cv-07242-JMF, 67 in 1:14-cv-04759-JMF, 96 in 1:14-cv-04699-JMF, 78 in 1:14-cv-04676-JMF, 76 in 1:14-cv-04685-JMF, 89 in 1:14-cv-04808-JMF, 34 in 1:14-cv-07977-JMF, 74 in 1:14-cv-02714-JMF, 93 in 1:14-cv-04701-JMF, 80 in 1:14-cv-04704-JMF, 75 in 1:14-cv-04731-JMF, 66 in 1:14-cv-05350-JMF, 84 in 1:14-cv-04707-JMF, 56 in 1:14-cv-05506-JMF, 30 in 1:14-cv-07631-JMF, 54 in 1:14-cv-05035-JMF, 80 in 1:14-cv-04738-JMF, 81 in 1:14-cv-04348-JMF, 66 in 1:14-cv-05137-JMF, 88 in 1:14-cv-04345-JMF, 75 in 1:14-cv-04768-JMF, 103 in 1:14-cv-04226-JMF, 94 in 1:14-cv-04346-JMF, 59 in 1:14-cv-05810-JMF, 81 in 1:14-cv-04741-JMF, 68 in 1:14-cv-05336-JMF, 59 in 1:14-cv-05850-JMF, 14 in 1:14-cv-09110-JMF, 10 in 1:14-cv-10023-JMF, 55 in 1:14-cv-05338-JMF, 60 in 1:14-cv-05754-JMF, 81 in 1:14-cv-04755-JMF, 75 in 1:14-cv-04802-JMF, 46 in 1:14-cv-07623-JMF, 68 in 1:14-cv-04857-JMF, 83 in 1:14-cv-04752-JMF, 46 in 1:14-cv-08133-JMF, 13 in 1:14-cv-09431-JMF, 18 in 1:14-cv-09712-JMF, 74 in 1:14-cv-04672-JMF, 82 in 1:14-cv-04690-JMF, 76 in 1:14-cv-04662-JMF, 22 in 1:14-cv-09466-JMF, 81 in 1:14-cv-04754-JMF, 114 in 1:14-cv-04268-JMF, 74 in 1:14-cv-03326-JMF, 97 in 1:14-cv-04727-JMF, 87 in 1:14-cv-04265-JMF, 70 in 1:14-cv-03298-JMF, 45 in 1:14-cv-07475-JMF, 87 in 1:14-cv-04273-JMF, 75 in 1:14-cv-05349-JMF, 112 in 1:14-cv-04751-JMF, 68 in 1:14-cv-05501-JMF, 75 in 1:14-cv-04641-JMF, 59 in 1:14-cv-05328-JMF, 81 in 1:14-cv-04650-JMF, 73 in 1:14-cv-04778-JMF, 62 in 1:14-cv-05332-JMF, 24 in 1:14-cv-08885-JMF, 57 in 1:14-cv-05752-JMF, 88 in 1:14-cv-04270-JMF, 91 in 1:14-cv-04775-JMF, 72 in 1:14-cv-04784-JMF, 88 in 1:14-cv-04691-JMF, 47 in 1:14-cv-07224-JMF, 63 in 1:14-cv-05880-JMF, 78 in 1:14-cv-04771-JMF, 38 in 1:14-cv-08134-JMF, 72 in 1:14-cv-04714-JMF, 48 in 1:14-cv-08386-JMF, 65 in 1:14-cv-05458-JMF, 78 in 1:14-cv-04799-JMF, 67 in 1:14-cv-04801-JMF, 89 in 1:14-cv-04715-JMF, 499 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 73 in 1:14-cv-04637-JMF, 77 in 1:14-cv-04720-JMF, 100 in 1:14-cv-04756-JMF, 142 in 1:14-cv-04342-JMF, 36 in 1:14-cv-08891-JMF, 69 in 1:14-cv-04858-JMF, 28 in 1:14-cv-08317-JMF, 57 in 1:14-cv-05750-JMF, 76 in 1:14-cv-04859-JMF, 68 in 1:14-cv-05325-JMF, 74 in 1:14-cv-04340-JMF, 59 in 1:14-cv-09058-JMF, 23 in 1:14-cv-08248-JMF, 47 in 1:14-cv-06830-JMF, 56 in 1:14-cv-05347-JMF, 86 in 1:14-cv-04717-JMF, 69 in 1:14-cv-04686-JMF, 30 in 1:14-cv-07979-JMF, 73 in 1:14-cv-04667-JMF, 23 in 1:14-cv-09469-JMF, 68 in 1:14-cv-04781-JMF, 123 in 1:14-cv-04267-JMF, 81 in 1:14-cv-04350-JMF, 67 in 1:14-cv-04760-JMF, 29 in 1:14-cv-08892-JMF, 23 in 1:14-cv-08883-JMF, 58 in 1:14-cv-05746-JMF, 73 in 1:14-cv-04684-JMF, 113 in 1:14-cv-04339-JMF, 62 in 1:14-cv-05345-JMF, 73 in 1:14-cv-04810-JMF, 85 in 1:14-cv-04630-JMF, 41 in 1:14-cv-08130-JMF, 93 in 1:14-cv-05461-JMF, 62 in 1:14-cv-05503-JMF, 81 in 1:14-cv-04338-JMF, 75 in 1:14-cv-08540-JMF, 75 in 1:14-cv-04758-JMF, 65 in 1:14-cv-05323-JMF, 82 in 1:14-cv-04702-JMF, 51 in 1:14-cv-05715-JMF, 80 in 1:14-cv-04732-JMF, 116 in 1:14-cv-04272-JMF, 52 in 1:14-cv-07477-JMF, 85 in 1:14-cv-05326-JMF) MOTION for Reconsideration of Order No. 29. . Document filed by Ishmail Sesay. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF et al.(Peller, Gary)
February 5, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE granting (568) Motion for Rodrigo R. De Llano to Appear Pro Hac Vice in case 1:14-md-02543-JMF; granting (15) Motion for Rodrigo R. De Llano to Appear Pro Hac Vice; granting (16) Motion for Rodrigo R. De Llano to Appear Pro Hac Vice in case 1:15-cv-00764-JMF. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 15-CV-764 Docket Nos. 15 & 16 and 14-MD-2543 Docket No. 568. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/5/2015) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 1:15-cv-00764-JMF (tn)
February 4, 2015 >>>NOTICE REGARDING PRO HAC VICE MOTION. Regarding Document No. #16 MOTION for Rodrigo Ruben De Llano to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff.. The document has been reviewed and there are no deficiencies. (sdi)
February 4, 2015 Filing 16 MOTION for Rodrigo Ruben De Llano to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by Ryan Charles Smith. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Order for Admission Pro Hac Vice, #2 Supplement Certificates of Good Standing)(De Llano, Rodrigo)
February 3, 2015 >>>NOTICE REGARDING PRO HAC VICE MOTION. Regarding Document No. (15 in 1:15-cv-00764-JMF, 568 in 1:14-md-02543-JMF) MOTION for Rodrigo Ruben De Llano to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number 0208-10558412. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff.. The document has been reviewed and there are no deficiencies. Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 1:15-cv-00764-JMF(wb)
February 3, 2015 Filing 15 MOTION for Rodrigo Ruben De Llano to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number 0208-10558412. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by Ryan Charles Smith. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Order for Admission Pro Hac Vice, #2 Supplement Certificates of Good Standing)Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-md-02543-JMF, 1:15-cv-00764-JMF(De Llano, Rodrigo)
February 2, 2015 NOTE TO OUT OF STATE ATTORNEYS: Please visit the Court's website at http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov for information regarding admission to the S.D.N.Y. Bar and the CM/ECF Rules & Filing Instructions. (sjo)
February 2, 2015 Magistrate Judge Michael H. Dolinger is so designated. (sjo)
February 2, 2015 Case Designated ECF. (sjo)
February 2, 2015 CONSOLIDATED MDL CASE: Create association to 1:14-md-02543-JMF. (sjo)
February 2, 2015 CASE ACCEPTED AS RELATED. Create association to 1:14-md-02543-JMF. (sjo)
February 2, 2015 Filing 14 MDL TRANSFERRED IN from the United States District Court - District of California Northern; Case Number: 3:15-cv-00059. Original file certified copy of transfer order and docket entries received. (sjo)
January 30, 2015 Case electronically transferred to USDC Southern District of New York. (vlkS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2015) [Transferred from California Northern on 2/2/2015.]
January 30, 2015 Filing 13 MDL ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE to the USDC Southern District of New York. Signed by the MDL Panel on 1/21/2015. (vlkS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2015) [Transferred from California Northern on 2/2/2015.]
January 30, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 12 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Hon. William H. Orrick for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu no longer assigned to the case. Signed by the Executive Committee on January 30, 2015. (cjlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2015) [Transferred from California Northern on 2/2/2015.]
January 29, 2015 Filing 11 CLERK'S NOTICE OF IMPENDING REASSIGNMENT TO A U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: The Clerk of this Court will now randomly reassign this case to a District Judge because either (1) a party has not consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge, or (2) time is of the essence in deciding a pending judicial action for which the necessary consents to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction have not been secured. You will be informed by separate notice of the district judge to whom this case is reassigned. ALL HEARING DATES PRESENTLY SCHEDULED BEFORE THE CURRENT MAGISTRATE JUDGE ARE VACATED AND SHOULD BE RE-NOTICED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE JUDGE TO WHOM THIS CASE IS REASSIGNED. This is a text only docket entry; there is no document associated with this notice. (vlkS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/29/2015) [Transferred from California Northern on 2/2/2015.]
January 28, 2015 Filing 10 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Ryan Charles Smith.. (Kaiser, Jeffrey) (Filed on 1/28/2015) [Transferred from California Northern on 2/2/2015.]
January 28, 2015 Filing 9 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal Pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(1)(A)(i) by Ryan Charles Smith (Kaiser, Jeffrey) (Filed on 1/28/2015) [Transferred from California Northern on 2/2/2015.]
January 22, 2015 Filing 8 CLERK'S NOTICE Re: Consent or Declination: Plaintiff shall file a consent or declination to proceed before a magistrate judge within 14 days of this notice. The forms are available at: http://cand.uscourts.gov/civilforms. (This is a text only docket entry, there is no document associated with this notice.) (ig, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/22/2015) [Transferred from California Northern on 2/2/2015.]
January 8, 2015 Filing 7 Summons Issued as to DPH-DAS LLC, Delphi Automotive PLC, General Motors Holding, LLC, General Motors, LLC. (vlk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/8/2015) [Transferred from California Northern on 2/2/2015.]
January 8, 2015 Filing 6 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 4/1/2015. Case Management Conference set for 4/8/2015 01:30 PM. (vlk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/8/2015) [Transferred from California Northern on 2/2/2015.]
January 7, 2015 Filing 5 Civil Cover Sheet by Ryan Charles Smith . (Kaiser, Jeffrey) (Filed on 1/7/2015) [Transferred from California Northern on 2/2/2015.]
January 7, 2015 Filing 4 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu. Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E-Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. Counsel is required to send chambers a copy of the initiating documents pursuant to L.R. 5-1(e)(7). A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. (sv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/7/2015) [Transferred from California Northern on 2/2/2015.]
January 6, 2015 Filing 3 Certificate of Interested Entities by Ryan Charles Smith (Kaiser, Jeffrey) (Filed on 1/6/2015) [Transferred from California Northern on 2/2/2015.]
January 6, 2015 Filing 2 Proposed Summons. (Kaiser, Jeffrey) (Filed on 1/6/2015) [Transferred from California Northern on 2/2/2015.]
January 6, 2015 Filing 1 COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL against DPH-DAS LLC, Delphi Automotive PLC, General Motors Holding, LLC, General Motors, LLC ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0971-9186994.). Filed byRyan Charles Smith. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Kaiser, Jeffrey) (Filed on 1/6/2015) [Transferred from California Northern on 2/2/2015.]

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Smith v. General Motors, LLC et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: General Motors, LLC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: General Motors L.L.C.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: General Motors Holding, L.L.C.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Smith
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jennifer Lankford
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: ALL PLAINTIFFS
Represented By: Brett A. Emison
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Berenice Summerville
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Ryan Charles Smith
Represented By: Jeffrey A. Kaiser
Represented By: Rodrigo Ruben De Llano
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Alternative dispute resolution (adr) provider: Brenda Gregory
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: King & Spalding LLP
Represented By: Tai Hyun Park
Represented By: Tami Scarola Stark
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?