Intuit Inc. v. Visa Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, N.D. California
DecidedMarch 5, 2021
Docket3:21-cv-01234
StatusUnknown

This text of Intuit Inc. v. Visa Inc. (Intuit Inc. v. Visa Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Intuit Inc. v. Visa Inc., (N.D. Cal. 2021).

Opinion

UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL on MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

IN RE: PAYMENT CARD INTERCHANGE FEE AND MERCHANT DISCOUNT ANTITRUST LITIGATION MDL No. 1720

(SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE)

CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO —33)

On October 19, 2005, the Panel transferred 14 civil action(s) to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407. See 398 F.Supp.2d 1356 (J.P.M.L. 2005). Since that time, 56 additional action(s) have been transferred to the Eastern District of New York. With the consent of that court, all such actions have been assigned to the Honorable Margo K. Brodie. It appears that the action(s) on this conditional transfer order involve questions of fact that are common to the actions previously transferred to the Eastern District of New York and assigned to Judge Brodie. Pursuant to Rule 7.1 of the Rules of Procedure of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, the action(s) on the attached schedule are transferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to the Eastern District of New York for the reasons stated in the order of October 19, 2005, and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Margo K. Brodie. This order does not become effective until it is filed in the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The transmittal of this order to said Clerk shall be stayed 7 days from the entry thereof. If any party files a notice of opposition with the Clerk of the Panel within this 7-day period, the stay will be continued until further order of the Panel. Inasmuch as no objection is pending at this time, the stay is lifted. FOR THE PANEL: 2 Sb. John W. Nichols Clerk of the Panel A TRUE COPY pare March'5, 21 DOUGLAS C. PALMER CLERK 7 BY Cingpd Tri nL. AUGUST MARZILIA Oe bed

IN RE: PAYMENT CARD INTERCHANGE FEE AND MERCHANT DISCOUNT ANTITRUST LITIGATION MDL No. 1720

SCHEDULE CTO-33 — TAG—-ALONG ACTIONS

DIST DIV. C.A.NO. CASE CAPTION

CALIFORNIA NORTHERN CAN 3 21-01234 Intuit Inc. et al v. Visa Inc. et al EDNY Docket Number 1:21-cv-01175(MKB)(VMS)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Payment Card Interchange Fee & Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation
398 F. Supp. 2d 1356 (Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Intuit Inc. v. Visa Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/intuit-inc-v-visa-inc-cand-2021.