FACTA Class Action Defense Cases—In re Oilily: Judicial Panel On Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) Grants Plaintiff Motion Unopposed By Defense To Centralize Class Action Litigation In Northern District of California

Jul 4, 2008 | By: Michael J. Hassen

Judicial Panel Grants Plaintiff Request for Pretrial Coordination of Class Action Lawsuits Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, Unopposed by any Class Action Defendants, and Transfers Class Actions to Northern District of California

Two class actions – one in California and one in Pennsylvania – were filed against Oilily and others alleging violations of the federal Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA). In re Oilily Fair & Acc. Cred. Trans. Act (FACTA) Litig., ___ F.Supp.2d ___ (Jud.Pan.Mult.Lit. April 10, 2008) [Slip Opn., at 1]. Both class actions alleged that defendants violated FACTA by printing certain credit and debit card information on customer receipts, _id._ Plaintiff’s lawyers in the Pennsylvania class action filed a motion with the Judicial Panel for Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) requesting centralization of the class actions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407 in the Northern District of California; plaintiffs in the California class action did not oppose the motion, and the motion was unopposed by any of the class action defendants. _Id._ The Judicial Panel granted the motion to centralize the class action lawsuits and agreed that the Northern District of California was the appropriate transferee court “because the first-filed action is pending there and this choice is unopposed.” _Id._ Accordingly, the Panel ordered the Pennsylvania class action be transferred to California, _id._, at 2.

Download PDF file of In re Oilily FACTA Litigation Transfer Order

Comments are closed.