Austin Hall 
Austin Hall, home of the Ames Courtroom.

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation sets up shop at Harvard Law School on November 19. 

Their Honors will hear argument on motions to centralize, in ONE district, cases pending in MULTIPLE districts. 

The matters up on Thursday:

SECTION A

MATTERS DESIGNATED FOR ORAL ARGUMENT

MDL No. 2103 — IN RE: KENTUCKY GRILLED CHICKEN COUPON MARKETING AND SALES PRACTICES LITIGATION

Motion of defendants KFC Corp. and Yum! Brands, Inc., for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois or, in the alternative, the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky:

Central District of California

James Asanuma, et al. v. KFC Corp., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-5246

Northern District of California

Daleen Brown v. KFC Corp., C.A. No. 3:09-3269

Northern District of Illinois

Christine Doering v. KFC Corp., C.A. No. 1:09-4166

Eastern District of Michigan

Kay Ready v. KFC Corp., C.A. No. 2:09-12827

MDL No. 2104 — IN RE: IKO ROOFING SHINGLE PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

Motion of defendants IKO Manufacturing, Inc.; IKO Chicago, Inc.; and IKO Pacific, Inc., for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois:

Northern District of Illinois

Pamela D. McNeil, et al. v. IKO Manufacturing, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-4443

District of New Jersey

Debra Zanetti v. IKO Manufacturing, Inc., C.A. No. 2:09-2017

Western District of New York

Gerald P. Czuba, et al. v. IKO Manufacturing, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-409

Western District of Washington

Michael Hight, et al. v. IKO Manufacturing, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-887

MDL No. 2105 — IN RE: RITE AID CORP. WAGE AND HOUR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES LITIGATION

Motion of plaintiffs James Fisher; Justin Torres; Robert T. Vasvari; Shirley Craig; Rachel Harriman; Deanna Johnson; Lisa Laun; Deshawn Powell; Eric Rosen; John MacDonald; Michael Veri; and John Kuhl, Sr., for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania:

District of Maryland

James Fisher v. Rite Aid Corp., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-1909

District of New Jersey

Justin Torres v. Rite Aid Corp., C.A. No. 3:09-2922

Southern District of New York

Yatram Indergit v. Rite Aid Corp., et al., C.A. No. 1:08-9361

Angel Naula, et al. v. Rite Aid of New York, Inc., C.A. No. 1:08-11364

Northern District of Ohio

Robert T. Vasvari v. Rite Aid Corp., et al., C.A. No. 4:09-1699

Middle District of Pennsylvania

Morgan Jackson, et al. v. Rite Aid Corp., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-1063

Shirley Craig v. Rite Aid Corp., et al., C.A. No. 4:08-2317

MDL No. 2106 — IN RE: FONTAINEBLEAU LAS VEGAS CONTRACT LITIGATION

Motion of plaintiffs Avenue CLO Fund, Ltd., et al., for centralization of certain of the following actions in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and motion of Turnberry Residential Limited Partner, L.P., and Jeffrey Soffer for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida:

Southern District of Florida

Fontainebleau Las Vegas LLC v. Bank of America, N.A., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-21879

District of Nevada

Avenue CLO Fund, Ltd., et al. v. Bank of America, N.A., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-1047

Southern District of New York

Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas v. Jeffrey Soffer, et al., C.A. No. 1:09-7089

MDL No. 2107 — IN RE: BUDEPRION XL MARKETING AND SALES PRACTICES LITIGATION

Motion of defendants Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.; Teva Parenteral Medicines, Inc.; Anchen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; and Impax Laboratories, Inc., for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas or, in the alternative, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana:

Central District of California

Laura Kelly v. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-5348

Middle District of Florida

Sherri Henchenski, et al. v. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-470

Eastern District of Louisiana

Andrew Morgan v. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-4409

Eastern District of North Carolina

Camilla Snipes Weber v. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., et al., C.A. No. 7:09-113

Eastern District of Pennsylvania

Steven Rosenfeld v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-2811

Northern District of Texas

Theresa L. Anderson v. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., et al., C.A. No. 3:09-1200

MDL No 2108 — IN RE: APPLEBEE’S WEIGHT WATCHERS MENU MARKETING AND SALES PRACTICES LITIGATION

Motion of defendants Applebee’s International, Inc.; DineEquity, Inc.; and Weight Watchers International, Inc., for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas:

Northern District of Illinois

Jaime Jaramillo, et al. v. DineEquity, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-1983

District of Kansas

Sheree Shepard, et al. v. DineEquity, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 2:08-2416

Eastern District of Kentucky

Anita Kramer, et al. v. Applebee’s International, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-131

Southern District of Ohio

Pamela Curry v. Appelbee’s International, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-505

MDL No. 2109 — IN RE: PLASMA-DERIVATIVE PROTEIN THERAPIES ANTITRUST LITIGATION

Motion of plaintiff Hospital Damas, Inc., for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois:

Northern District of Illinois

Hospital Damas, Inc. v. CSL Ltd., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-5130

Eastern District of Pennsylvania

Pemiscot Memorial Hospital v. CSL Ltd., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-3143

Solaris Health Systems v. Baxter International, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-3342

MDL No. 2110 — IN RE: LUKE FOUT AND TODD WUERDEMAN LITIGATION

Motion of defendant CSX Transportation, Inc., for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio:

Northern District of Illinois

Todd Wuerdeman v. Illinois Central Railroad Co., C.A. No. 1:08-6043

Southern District of Ohio

Luke Fout v. CSX Transportation, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:08-721

Todd Wuerdeman v. CSX Transportation, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:08-746

MDL No. 2111 — IN RE: AMERICAN EXPRESS CO. ANTI-STEERING RULES ANTITRUST LITIGATION

Motion of plaintiffs Lopez-Dejonge, Inc.; Parlor Corp.; JASA, Inc.; Italian Colors Restaurant; Cohen Rese Gallery, Inc.; Bar Hama, LLC; and Animal Land, Inc., for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York or, in the alternative, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York:

Eastern District of New York

Rite Aid Corp., et al. v. American Express Travel Related Services Co., Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:08-2315

CVS Pharmacy, Inc. v. American Express Travel Related Services Co., Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:08-2316

Walgreen Co. v. American Express Travel Related Services Co., Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:08-2317

Bi-Lo, LLC v. American Express Travel Related Services Co., Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:08-2380

H.E. Butt Grocery Co. v. American Express Travel Related Services Co., Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:08-2406

Southern District of New York

Performance Labs, Inc., et al. v. American Express Co., et al., C.A. No. 1:06-2974

MDL No. 2112 — IN RE: FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS SEXUAL HARASSMENT BY INMATES LITIGATION

Motion of plaintiffs Donna Austin, et al., for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida:

Middle District of Florida

Marsha Bennett, et al. v. Department of Corrections, State of Florida, C.A. No. 2:09-549

Tara Archer, et al. v. Department of Corrections, State of Florida, C.A. No. 3:09-864

Beebe L. Clark, et al. v. Department of Corrections, State of Florida, C.A. No. 5:09-358

Northern District of Florida

Donna Austin, et al. v. Department of Corrections, State of Florida, C.A. No. 4:09-97

Southern District of Florida

Eugenia V. Davis, et al. v. Department of Corrections, State of Florida, C.A. No. 1:09-22446

Cindy Baker, et al. v. Department of Corrections, State of Florida, C.A. No. 2:09-14281

MDL No. 2113 — IN RE: AFTERMARKET AUTOMOTIVE SHEET METAL PARTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION

Motion of plaintiff Vehimax International, LLC, for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the Central District of California or, in the alternative, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin:

Central District of California

Vehimax International, LLC v. Jui Li Enterprise Co., Ltd., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-6437

Eastern District of Wisconsin

Fond du Lac Bumper Exchange Inc. v. Jui Li Enterprise Co., Ltd., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-852

MDL No. 2115 — IN RE: PFIZER INC. MARKETING AND SALES PRACTICES LITIGATION

Motion of plaintiff Kathleen Zafarana for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania:

District of Massachusetts

Michael Alan Caltieri, etc. v. Pfizer Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-11480

Eastern District of Pennsylvania

Stefan Kruszewski, etc. v. Pfizer Inc., C.A. No. 2:07-4106

Kathleen Zafarana v. Pfizer Inc., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-4026

MDL No. 2116 — IN RE: APPLE IPHONE 3G AND 3G-S “MMS” MARKETING AND SALES PRACTICES LITIGATION

Motion of defendant AT&T Mobility, LLC, for centralization of certain of the following actions in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana or, in the alternative, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio and motion of plaintiffs Philip Sterker and Arturo Molina for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California or, in the alternative, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana:

Central District of California

Aida Kamarian v. Apple, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-6590

Tim Williams, et al. v. Apple, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-6914

Northern District of California

Philip Sterker v. Apple, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 4:09-4242

Kevin Khoi Duy Tran v. Apple, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 5:09-4048

Southern District of California

Arturo Molina v. Apple, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 3:09-2032

Southern District of Illinois

Tim Meeker v. Apple, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 3:09-607

Eastern District of Louisiana

Christopher Carbine, et al. v. Apple, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-5470

District of Minnesota

Kyle Irving v. Apple, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 0:09-2613

Eastern District of Missouri

Meredith Goette, et al. v. Apple, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 4:09-1480

Northern District of Ohio

Michael Pietrangelo v. Apple, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-1992

Matthew Sullivan v. Apple, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-1993

Deborah Carr v. Apple, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-1996

MDL No. 2118 — IN RE: CYCLOBENZAPRINE HYDROCHLORIDE EXTENDED-RELEASE CAPSULE PATENT LITIGATION

Motion of plaintiffs Eurand, Inc., et al., for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware:

Central District of California

Eurand, Inc., et al. v. Anchen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-4931

Eurand, Inc., et al. v. Anchen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 8:09-1098

District of Delaware

Eurand, Inc., et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:08-889

Eurand, Inc., et al. v. Impax Laboratories, Inc., C.A. No. 1:09-18

Eurand, Inc., et al. v. Anchen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-492

Eurand, Inc., et al. v. Anchen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-715

MDL No. 2119 — IN RE: MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS (MERS) LITIGATION

Motion of defendants CitiMortgage, Inc.; Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.; MERSCORP, Inc.; National City Bank; National City Mortgage; National City Corp.; PNC Financial Services Group, Inc.; and AIG United Guaranty Corp. for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona:

District of Arizona

Olga Cervantes, et al. v. Countrywide Home Loans, et al., C.A. No. 2:09-517

Jonathan E. Robinson, et al. v. GE Money Bank, et al., C.A. No. 4:09-227

Central District of California

Alfonso Vargas, et al. v. Countywide Home Loans, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-2309

District of Nevada

Josefa S. Lopez, et al. v. Executive Trustee Service, LLC, et al., C.A. No. 3:09-180

Aleta Rose Goodwin, et al. v. Executive Trustee Services, LLC, et al., C.A. No. 3:09-306

Joseph Green, et al. v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 3:09-374

Lacy J. Dalton, et al. v. CitiMortgage, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 3:09-534

MDL No. 2120 — IN RE: PAMIDRONATE PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

Order to show cause for centralization of certain claims in the following actions in a single United States district court:

District of District of Columbia

Laura Brooks v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., et al., C.A. No. 1:08-484

Dara Pace v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., et al., C.A. No. 1:08-634

Suzanne Eckblom, et al. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-440

M. Margaret Patterson, et al. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-441

Middle District of Florida

James E. Lockard, et al. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., et al., C.A. No. 8:08-818

Susan Kahn v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., et al., C.A. No. 8:09-1529

Northern District of Florida

Ben J. Smith, et al. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-13

Southern District of New York

Gary Dale Fry v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-7264

Evan Chandler v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., et al., C.A. No. 1:09-7265

MDL No. 2121 — IN RE: FRETTED MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION

Motion of plaintiff David Giambusso for centralization of the following actions in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California:

Central District of California

Allen Hale v. Guitar Center, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-6897

Mark O'Leary v. Guitar Center, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 2:09-7015

Southern District of California

David Giambusso v. National Association of Music Merchants, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 3:09-2002

Colby Giles v. Guitar Center, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 3:09-2146

Rory W. Collins v. Guitar Center, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 3:09-2151

David Keel v. Guitar Center, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 3:09-2156

Northern District of Illinois

Alex Teller v. Guitar Center, Inc., C.A. No. 1:09-6104

Feed-icon-14x14 Our feed will attend The Game this weekend.

Print:
Email this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Barry Barnett Barry Barnett

Clients and colleagues call Barry Barnett an “incredibly gifted lawyer” (Chambers and Partners) who is “magic in the courtroom” (Who’s Who Legal), “the top antitrust lawyer in Texas” (Chambers and Partners), and “a person of unquestioned integrity” (David J. Beck, founder of Beck…

Clients and colleagues call Barry Barnett an “incredibly gifted lawyer” (Chambers and Partners) who is “magic in the courtroom” (Who’s Who Legal), “the top antitrust lawyer in Texas” (Chambers and Partners), and “a person of unquestioned integrity” (David J. Beck, founder of Beck Redden).

Barnett is a Fellow in the American College of Trial Lawyers, and Lawdragon has named him one of the top 500 lawyers in the United States three years in a row. Best Lawyers in America has honored him as “Lawyer of the Year” for Bet-the-Company Litigation (2019 and 2017) and Patent Litigation (2020) in Houston. Based in Texas and New York, Barnett has tried complex business disputes across the United States.

TRIAL COUNSEL
Barnett’s background, training, and experience make him indispensable to his clients. The small-town son of a Texas roughneck and grandson of a Texas sharecropper, Barnett “developed an unusual common sense about people, their motivations, and their dilemmas,” according to former client Michael Lewis.

Barnett has been historically recognized for his effectiveness and judgment. His peers chose him, for example, to the American College of Trial Lawyers and American Law Institute. His decades of trial and appellate work representing both plaintiffs and defendants have made him a master strategist and nimble tactician in complex disputes.

Barnett focuses on enforcement of antitrust laws, the “Magna Carta of free enterprise,” in Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall’s memorable phrase. “Barry is one of the nation’s outstanding antitrust lawyers,” according to Joseph Goldberg, a member of the Private Antitrust Enforcement Hall of Fame. Named among Texas’s top ten antitrust lawyers of 2023, Business Today calls Barnett a “trailblazer” among the “distinguished legal minds” who “dedicate their skill and expertise to the maintenance of healthy competition in various sectors” of the Lone Star State’s booming economy. Barnett is also adept in energy and intellectual property matters and has battled for clients against a Who’s Who list of corporate behemoths, including Abbott Labs, Alcoa, Apple, AT&T, BlackBerry, Broadcom, Comcast, Dow, JPMorgan Chase, Samsung, and Visa.

Barnett commands a courtroom with calm and credibility and “is the perfect lawyer for bet the company litigation,” said Scott Regan, General Counsel of former client Whiting Petroleum. His performance before the Supreme Court in Comcast Corp. v. Behrend prompted the Court to withdraw the question on which it had granted review. The judge in a trial involving mobile phone technology called Barnett “one of the best” and that his opening statement the finest he had ever seen. Another trial judge told Barnett minutes after a jury returned a favorable verdict against the county’s biggest employer that he was one of the two best trial lawyers he’d ever come across—adding that the other one was dead.

COMPLETE PACKAGE
A versatile trial lawyer, Barnett knows how to handle a case all the way from strategic pre-suit planning to affirmance on appeal. He’s tried cases to verdict and then briefed and argued them when they went before appellate courts, including the Second, Third, Fifth, and Tenth Circuits, the Supreme Court of Louisiana, and (in the case of Comcast Corp. v. Behrend) the Supreme Court of the United States.

Barnett is a sought-after public speaker, often serving on panels and talking about topics like the trials of antitrust class actions and techniques for streamlining complex litigation. He also comments on trends in commercial litigation and the implications of major rulings for outlets such as NPR, Reuters, Law360, Corporate Counsel, and The Dallas Morning News. He’s even appeared in a Frontline program about underfunding of state pensions, authored chapters on “Fee Arrangements” and “Techniques for Expediting and Streamlining Litigation” (the latter with Steve Susman) in the ABA’s definitive treatise on Business and Commercial Litigation in Federal Courts, 5th, and commented on How Antitrust Enforcers Might Think Like Plaintiffs’ Lawyers.

HARD GRADERS
Clients and other hard graders have praised Barnett for his courtroom skills and legal acumen.

A client in a $100 million oil and gas case, which Barnett’s team won at trial and held on appeal, said Barnett and his team “presented a rare combination of strong legal intellect, common sense about right and wrong, and credibility in the courtroom.” David McCombs at Haynes and Boone said Barnett “has a natural presence that goes over well with juries and judges.”

Even former adversaries give Barnett high marks. Lead opposing counsel in a decade-long antitrust slugfest said “Barry is a highly skilled advocate. He understands what really matters in telling a narrative and does so in a very compelling manner.”

CIVIC ENGAGEMENT
Barnett relishes opportunities to collaborate with all kinds of people. At the Center for American and International Law (CAIL), founded by a former prosecutor at Nuremberg in 1947 and headquartered in the Dallas area, he has served on the Executive Committee, co-chaired the committee that produced CAIL’s first-ever strategic plan, supported CAIL’s Institute for Law Enforcement Administration and other development efforts, and proposed formation of a new Institute for Social Justice Law. CAIL’s former President David Beck said “Barry is extremely bright” and is “very well prepared in every lawsuit or professional task he undertakes.”

Barnett is also a Trustee of the New-York Historical Society, a Sterling Fellow at Yale, a member of the Yale University Art Gallery’s Governing Board, a winner of the Class Award for his work on behalf of his college class, and a proud contributor to the Yellow Ribbon Program at Harvard Law. Barnett’s pro bono work includes leading the trial team representing people who are at greatest risk of severe illness and death as a result of being exposed to the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 while being detained in the Dallas County jail—work for which he received the NGAN Legal Advocacy Fund RBG Award.

At Susman Godfrey, Barnett has served on the firm’s Executive Committee, Employment Committee, and ad hoc committees on partner compensation, succession of leadership, and revision of the firm’s partnership agreement. He also twice chaired the Practice Development Committee.

KEEPING PERSPECTIVE
Barnett understands that clients face many pressures. Managing the stress is important, especially in matters that take years to resolve. He encourages clients to call him whenever they have a question or concern and to keep the inevitable ups and downs in perspective. He wants them to know that he will do his level best to help them achieve their goals. He also strives to foster trust and to make working with him a pleasure.

Cyrus “Skip” Marter, the General Counsel of Bonanza Creek in Denver and a former Susman Godfrey partner and client, said Barnett is “excellent about communicating with clients in a full and honest manner” and can “negotiate for his clients from a position of strength, because he is not afraid to take a case through a full trial on the merits.” Stacey Doré, the President of Hunt Utility Services and a former client, said that Barnett is “an excellent trial lawyer and the person you want to hire for your bet-the-company cases. He is client focused, responsive, and uniquely savvy about trial and settlement strategy.” A New York colleague said, “Barry is a joy to work with as co-counsel. He tackles complex procedural and factual hurdles capably, efficiently, and without drama.”

PERSONAL
Barnett’s wide-ranging experience and calm, down-to-earth approach enable him to connect with clients, judges, jurors, witnesses, and even opposing counsel. He grew up in Nacogdoches, Texas. He co-captained his high school varsity football team as an All-East Texas middle linebacker while also serving as the Editor of Key Club’s Texas-Oklahoma District, won the Best Typist award, took the History Team to glory, and sang in the East Texas All Region Choir. As Dan Kelly of client Vistra Corp. put it, Barnett is “a great person to be around.”

Barnett is steady and loyal. He has practiced at Susman Godfrey his entire career. He and his wife Nancy live in Dallas and enjoy spending time in Houston and New York. Their daughter works for H-E-B in Houston, and their son is a Haynes and Boone transactions lawyer in Dallas.

As a member of Ivy League championship football teams in his junior and senior years at Yale and a parent of two Yalies, Barnett has no trouble choosing sides for “The Game” in November. And he knows how important fighting all the way to the end is. On his last play from scrimmage, in the waning minutes of The Game on Nov. 22, 1980, he recovered a Crimson fumble.

Yale won, 14-0.