In re Motor Fuel Temperature Sales Practices Litigation

Good Law
711 F.3d 1050·2013 WL 1189495·2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 5525
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 19, 2013California3,628 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kozinski, J.

The administrative matter pending before me concerns three cases that had originally been filed in three separate districts in California:

These cases were referred (along with others) to the District of Kansas by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation for consolidated pre-trial proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 1407. These proceedings were conducted before the Honorable Kathryn H. Vratil, Chief Judge of that district. Pretrial proceedings apparently having concluded, Chief Judge Vratil has decided to ask the Multidistrict Panel to remand these cases back to California for trial. So far as I’m aware, that transfer hasn’t yet occurred, but I have no doubt that it will.

On remand, the cases would normally be returned for trial to the judges before whom they were previously pending. In this case, however, Chief Judge Vratil has graciously indicated her willingness to travel to California to conduct the trial(s). Because Chief Judge Vratil’s duty station is in the Tenth Circuit, she may only preside over a trial in the Ninth Circuit with the approval of the Chief Justice of the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 292 (d).

The Chief Justice has adopted Guidelines for the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.