Shottafer v. Equifax Information Services LLC

CourtDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia
DecidedDecember 2, 2019
Docket1:19-cv-05463
StatusUnknown

This text of Shottafer v. Equifax Information Services LLC (Shottafer v. Equifax Information Services LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Shottafer v. Equifax Information Services LLC, (N.D. Ga. 2019).

Opinion

UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL on MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

IN RE: EQUIFAX, INC., CUSTOMER DATA SECURITY BREACH LITIGATION MDL No. 2800

(SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE)

CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO —55)

On December 6, 2017, the Panel transferred 76 civil action(s) to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407. See 289 F.Supp.3d 1322 (J.P.M.L. 2017). Since that time, 269 additional action(s) have been transferred to the Northern District of Georgia. With the consent of that court, all such actions have been assigned to the Honorable Thomas W. Thrash, Jr. 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 Northern District of Georgia and assigned to Judge Thrash. 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 Northern District of Georgia for the reasons stated in the order of December 6, 2017, and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Thomas W. Thrash, Jr. This order does not become effective until it is filed in the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. 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 _o—_ FOR THE PANEL: cusps oFtice SL BA ATTEST: A TRUE COPY John W. Nichols CERTIFIED THIS Clerk of the Panel Date: 12/2/2019 Gane’. Disere JAMES N. HATTEN, Clerk [y ©) * * By: s/ Ashley Coleman Z| □□ Deputy Clerk Qe Deana &

IN RE: EQUIFAX, INC., CUSTOMER DATA SECURITY BREACH LITIGATION MDL No. 2800

SCHEDULE CTO-55 — TAG-ALONG ACTIONS

DIST DIV. C.A.NO. CASE CAPTION

CALIFORNIA CENTRAL CAC 5 19-01936 Audella Patterson v. Equifax, Inc. et al HAWAII HI 1 19-00263 Silva v. Equifax, Inc. INDIANA SOUTHERN NS + 419—93679 GRANGER-+EQUIFAXAING. Opposed 11/25/19 NEVADA NV 2 19—-01909 Pinnock v. Equifax Information Services LLC NV 2 19-01910 Shottafer v. Equifax Information Services LLC NV 2 19-01912 Steinmetz v. Equifax Information Services LLC NV 2 19-01913 Simoncic v. Equifax Information Services LLC NV 2 19-01914 Winder v. Equifax Information Services LLC

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

Related

In re Equifax, Inc., Customer Data Sec. Breach Litig.
289 F. Supp. 3d 1322 (Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Shottafer v. Equifax Information Services LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shottafer-v-equifax-information-services-llc-gand-2019.