Palladino v. JPMorgan Chase & Co.

N.D. California

Palladino v. JPMorgan Chase & Co.

DecidedFebruary 10, 2023

Docket4:23-cv-00423

StatusUnknown

This text of Palladino v. JPMorgan Chase & Co. (Palladino v. JPMorgan Chase & Co.) 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

Palladino v. JPMorgan Chase & Co., (N.D. Cal. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

ve TIRE cory U.S, District Court E.D.N.Y. vA pebriary 2/10/2023 ra *aiONEY UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL movements (7 |||||| Wa arene py ine te As on Z SDERUEEPT ERK MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

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

(SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE)

CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO -34)

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, 57 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 □□□□□ period, the stay will be continued until further order of the Panel.

FOR THE PANEL: pending athe, Me ° LA BPA Feb 10, 2023 RTeD srares John W. Nichols MUCTIDISTRICT LITIGATION Clerk of the Panel

IN RE: PAYMENT CARD INTERCHANGE FEE AND MERCHANT DISCOUNT ANTITRUST LITIGATION MDL No. 1720 SCHEDULE CTO−34 − TAG−ALONG ACTIONS

DIST DIV. C.A.NO. CASE CAPTION

CALIFORNIA NORTHERN CAN 4 23−00423 Palladino et al v. JPMorgan Chase & Co. et al

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

ve TIRE cory U.S, District Court E.D.N.Y. vA pebriary 2/10/2023 ra *aiONEY UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL movements (7 |||||| Wa arene py ine te As on Z SDERUEEPT ERK MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

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

(SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE)

CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO -34)

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, 57 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 □□□□□ period, the stay will be continued until further order of the Panel.

FOR THE PANEL: pending athe, Me ° LA BPA Feb 10, 2023 RTeD srares John W. Nichols MUCTIDISTRICT LITIGATION Clerk of the Panel

IN RE: PAYMENT CARD INTERCHANGE FEE AND MERCHANT DISCOUNT ANTITRUST LITIGATION MDL No. 1720 SCHEDULE CTO−34 − TAG−ALONG ACTIONS

DIST DIV. C.A.NO. CASE CAPTION

CALIFORNIA NORTHERN CAN 4 23−00423 Palladino et al v. JPMorgan Chase & Co. et al

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Palladino v. JPMorgan Chase & Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/palladino-v-jpmorgan-chase-co-cand-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack