All Terrain Vehicle Litigation, In re

978 F.2d 1265 RICO Bus.Disp.Guide 8153 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. In re ALL TERRAIN VEHICLE LITIGATION. Michael REINHEIMER; Wesley Weir; Michael Schwartzberger; Joseph Sposato; Robert Abers; Arthur Ingraham; Sylvia Grunor; Fred Booth, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. HONDA MOTOR CO. LTD., et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 91-55475. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 8, 1992. Decided Nov. 10, 1992. 1 Before JAMES R. BROWNING and FARRIS, Circuit Judges, GEORGE, * District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 Plaintiffs, a class of owners of three wheel all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), filed several separate suits in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against the Specialty Vehicle Industry Association of America and several manufacturers and distributors of ATVs. 1 Plaintiffs claimed ATVs are inherently dangerous and sought compensation for their economic loss under 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (RICO); the Consumer Product Safety Act, 15 U.S.C.…