Sardina

Certified to be a true and correct copy of the document on file — “ngelaE. Noble: Clark mune ie UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL §, py____v. Adams on LD a rr SY yu Aug 2 "Sabu" MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

IN RE: ZANTAC (RANITIDINE)

PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION MDL No. 2924

TRANSFER ORDER

Before the Panel:* Plaintiff the Sardina action listed on Schedule A moves under Panel Rule 7. to vacate our order that conditionally transferred Sardina to the Southern District of Florida for inclusion in MDL No. 2924. Defendant GlaxoSmithKline, LLC, opposes the motion to vacate. In support of his motion to vacate, plaintiff argues that federal subject matter jurisdiction over Sardina is lacking and that his pending motion for remand to state court should be decided before transfer. We are not persuaded by this argument. The Panel has held that such jurisdictional objections generally do not present an impediment to transfer.! See, e.g., In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. Sales Pracs. Litig., 170 F. Supp. 2d 1346, 1347-48 (J.P.M.L. 2001) (“[R]emand motions can be presented to and decided by the transferee…