Lexplug logoLexplug

In Re Northwest Airlines Corp. Privacy Litigation

United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
337 F. Supp. 2d 1360 (2004)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

A motion to centralize cases for multidistrict litigation under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 becomes moot when the underlying cases are dismissed to the point that only one action remains, thereby eliminating the 'multidistrict character' of the litigation.


Facts:

  • Northwest Airlines Corp. engaged in conduct related to passenger data that led to allegations of privacy violations.
  • At least nine separate lawsuits were filed by various plaintiffs against Northwest Airlines based on these allegations.
  • The lawsuits were filed in three different federal districts: the District of Minnesota, the District of North Dakota, and the Western District of Tennessee.
  • The various lawsuits all stemmed from a common set of circumstances regarding Northwest's privacy practices, creating the potential for coordinated litigation.

Procedural Posture:

  • Nine separate lawsuits were filed against Northwest Airlines Corp. by various plaintiffs in three different federal district courts (Minnesota, North Dakota, and Tennessee).
  • A plaintiff in the Tennessee action filed a motion with the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML).
  • The motion sought to centralize all nine actions for coordinated pretrial proceedings in the Eastern District of New York pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407.
  • Prior to the JPML hearing on the motion, the trial court in the District of Minnesota dismissed the seven actions pending in that district.
  • Following a hearing, the JPML deferred its decision on the motion, pending appeals of the Minnesota dismissals and rulings on motions in the remaining cases.
  • Subsequently, the trial court in the District of North Dakota dismissed the action pending in that district.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does a motion to centralize multiple actions under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 become moot when all but one of the actions under consideration have been dismissed?


Opinions:

Majority - Hodges, Chairman

Yes. A motion to centralize actions for multidistrict litigation is moot when only one of the original actions remains active. The statutory purpose of centralization under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 is to manage pretrial proceedings for multiple cases involving common questions of fact that are pending in different districts. In this instance, the prior dismissals of the seven Minnesota actions and the subsequent dismissal of the North Dakota action have eliminated the 'multidistrict character' of the litigation. As only a single case in Tennessee remains, there are no longer multiple actions to consolidate, rendering the motion moot.



Analysis:

This order serves as a clear, practical illustration of the mootness doctrine as it applies to Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) proceedings. The decision establishes that the authority of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) under § 1407 is contingent upon the continued existence of multiple, active cases in different districts. It demonstrates that intervening procedural events, such as dismissals in the constituent courts, can eliminate the statutory basis for centralization. The case is significant for showing that the JPML's function is strictly tied to the existence of a live, multi-district controversy, and its power to act dissolves once that controversy is reduced to a single-district dispute.

G

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: In Re Northwest Airlines Corp. Privacy Litigation (2004)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"