DOCSLIB.ORG

ETHICON, INC., PELVIC REPAIR SYSTEM PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION MDL No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ETHICON, INC., PELVIC REPAIR SYSTEM PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION MDL No IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION IN RE: ETHICON, INC., PELVIC REPAIR SYSTEM PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION MDL No. 2327 ------------------------------------------------- THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO ETHICON WAVE 1 CASES PRETRIAL ORDER # 215 (Wave 1 Cases – Briefing Schedule on Disputed Venue Recommendations) Pursuant to PTO # 205 (Second Amended Docket Control Order – Wave 1 Cases), the parties recently submitted a joint venue recommendation on the cases remaining in Wave 1, attached hereto as Exhibit A. In the joint venue recommendation, the parties identified four Wave 1 cases in which venue is in dispute. Those cases are: (1) Lozano 2:12-cv-00347; (2) Ware 2:12- cv-00761; (3) Joplin 2:12-cv-00787; and (4) Williams 2:12-cv-0511. It is ORDERED that in the individual Wave 1 cases listed above, briefs regarding proper venue are due as follows: Plaintiffs’ Briefs in Support of Venue Due: March 8, 2016 Defendants’ Response Briefs: March 11, 2016 Plaintiffs’ Reply Briefs: March 15, 2016 The parties are directed to file the above briefs in the respective individual cases listed above, not in MDL 2327. The court DIRECTS the Clerk to file a copy of this order in 2:12-md-2327 and in the Ethicon Wave 1 cases. In cases subsequently filed in this district after 2:16-cv-01997, a copy of the most recent pretrial order will be provided by the Clerk to counsel appearing in each new action at the time of filing of the complaint. In cases subsequently removed or transferred to this court, a copy of the most recent pretrial order will be provided by the Clerk to counsel appearing in each new action upon removal or transfer. It shall be the responsibility of the parties to review and abide by all pretrial orders previously entered by the court. The orders may be accessed through the CM/ECF system or the court’s website at www.wvsd.uscourts.gov. ENTER: March 1, 2016 2 EXHIBIT A IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION IN RE: ETHICON, INC., PELVIC REPAIR SYSTEM PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION MDL No. 2327 ------------------------------------------------- THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO ETHICON WAVE 1 CASES Plaintiff Civil Action Number Proposed Remand Jurisdiction Wilma Johnson 2:11‐cv‐00809 USDC, Southern District of West Virginia 2:12‐cv‐00256 Amy Holland USDC, Middle District of Georgia, Valdosta Division Carrie Smith 2:12‐cv‐00258 USDC, Middle District of Georgia, Macon Division 2:12‐cv‐00261 Mary F. Cone USDC, Southern District of Georgia, Waycross Division 2:12‐cv‐00276 Cathy Warlick USDC, Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division Joy Essman 2:12‐cv‐00277 USDC, District of Kansas, Kansas City Division 2:12‐cv‐00279 Susan Thaman USDC, District Court for the Southern District of Florida 2:12‐cv‐00286 Quillan R. Garnett USDC, Middle District of Georgia, Athens Division 2:12‐cv‐00335 Sandra Wolfe USDC, Western District of Missouri, Kansas City Division Kathleen Wolfe 2:12‐cv‐00337 USDC, Northern District of New York Rose Gomez 2:12‐cv‐00344 USDC, Eastern District of Pennsylvania 2:12‐cv‐00351 Kathy Barton USDC, Northern District of Georgia, Newnan Division Amanda Deleon 2:12‐cv‐00358 USDC, Eastern District of Pennsylvania 2:12‐cv‐00368 Sharon Boggs USDC, Southern District of Ohio, Western Division Dawna Hankins 2:12‐cv‐00369 USDC, Western District of Washington 2:12‐cv‐00376 Charlene Logan Taylor USDC, Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport Division 2:12‐cv‐00378 Tina Morrow USDC, Western District of Louisiana, Monroe Division 1 Plaintiff Civil Action Number Proposed Remand Jurisdiction 2:12‐cv‐00379 Teri Key Shively USDC, Western District of Louisiana, Monroe Division 2:12‐cv‐00387 Maru LuEllen Kilday USDC, Middle District of Georgia, Athens Division 2:12‐cv‐00389 Janice Renee Swaney USDC, Middle District of Georgia, Athens Division Carol Jean Dimock 2:12‐cv‐00401 USDC, District of Utah Pamela Free 2:12‐cv‐00423 USDC, Southern District of Indiana 2:12‐cv‐00443 USDC, Western District of Michigan, Grand Rapids Holly Jones Division Pamela Gray‐Wheeler 2:12‐cv‐00455 USDC, Northern District of Mississippi Amelia R. Gonzales 2:12‐cv‐00468 USDC, District of Arizona, Phoenix Division 2:12‐cv‐00469 Patricia Tyler USDC, Central District of California, Eastern Division Mary Jane Olson 2:12‐cv‐00470 USDC, District of Arizona Harriet Beach 2:12‐cv‐00476 USDC, District of Massachusetts, Boston Division Miranda Patterson 2:12‐cv‐00481 USDC, Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division 2:12‐cv‐00483 Carey Beth Cole USDC, Western District of Arkansas, Texarkana Division 2:12‐cv‐00485 Danni Laffoon USDC, Western District of Kentucky, Owensboro Division 2:12‐cv‐00486 Karen Forester USDC, Eastern District of Arkansas, Jonesboro Division Melissa Clayton 2:12‐cv‐00489 USDC, Eastern District of Louisiana, District L 2:12‐cv‐00490 Shirley Freeman USDC, Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division 2:12‐cv‐00491 Gwendolyn T. Young USDC, Middle District of Georgia, Athens Division 2:12‐cv‐00493 USDC, Eastern District of Tennessee, Northeastern Nancy Hooper Division Penelope Ann Link 2:12‐cv‐00494 Saurino USDC, Northern District of Georgia, Newman Division Andrea Carol Chandlee 2:12‐cv‐00495 USDC, Middle District of Florida 2:12‐cv‐00496 Sonya M. Moreland USDC, Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division 2:12‐cv‐00497 Dina Sanders Bennett USDC, Western District of Louisiana, Monroe Division Myndal Johnson 2:12‐cv‐00498 USDC, District of Minnesota 2:12‐cv‐00499 USDC, Eastern District of Tennessee, Northeastern Kimberly Thomas Division 2 Plaintiff Civil Action Number Proposed Remand Jurisdiction 2:12‐cv‐00500 Krystal Teasley USDC, Middle District of Georgia, Athens Division 2:12‐cv‐00501 Jennifer Sikes USDC, Northern District of Georgia, Gainesville Division 2:12‐cv‐00505 Mary Thurston USDC, Western District of Missouri, Kansas City Division 2:12‐cv‐00510 Charlene Miracle USDC, Eastern District of Tennessee, Knoxville Division Patricia Conti 2:12‐cv‐00516 USDC, Eastern District of Pennsylvania 2:12‐cv‐00517 USDC, Middle District of Pennsylvania, Harrisburg Joann Lehman Division 2:12‐cv‐00539 Ann Louise Ruppel Fuller USDC, District of Nevada 2:12‐cv‐00540 Nancy Feidler USDC, Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont Division Brenda Riddell 2:12‐cv‐00547 USDC, Eastern District of Kentucky 2:12‐cv‐00548 USDC, Southern District of Florida, Fort Lauderdale Rhoda Schachtman Division Sharon Carpenter 2:12‐cv‐00554 USDC, Southern District of Mississippi 2:12‐cv‐00555 Carolyn Sue Doyle USDC, Southern District of Florida, Ft. Pierce Division 2:12‐cv‐00567 Noemi Padilla USDC, Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division 2:12‐cv‐00571 Mary Catherine Wise USDC, Middle District of Georgia, Athens Division Beverly Kivel 2:12‐cv‐00591 USDC, District of Minnesota Frances Ann Cortez 2:12‐cv‐00594 USDC, Eastern District of Louisiana 2:12‐cv‐00595 Mary Hendrix USDC, Western District of Kentucky, Paducah Division 2:12‐cv‐00601 Deanna Jean Thomas USDC, Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division 2:12‐cv‐00651 Robin Bridges USDC, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division Maria C. Stone 2:12‐cv‐00652 USDC, District of Arizona 2:12‐cv‐00654 Stacy Shultis USDC, Eastern District of Wisconsin, Milwaukee Division Judy G. Williams 2:12‐cv‐00657 USDC, Western District of North Carolina Ana Ruebel 2:12‐cv‐00663 USDC, District of New Jersey Donna Loustaunau 2:12‐cv‐00666 USDC, Eastern District of Louisiana 2:12‐cv‐00683 Louise Grabowski USDC, District of South Carolina, Beaufort Division 3 Plaintiff Civil Action Number Proposed Remand Jurisdiction Beth Harter 2:12‐cv‐00737 USDC, Virginia Western District Sheri Scholl 2:12‐cv‐00738 USDC, Virginia Eastern District Margaret Kirkpatrick 2:12‐cv‐00746 USDC, Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division 2:12‐cv‐00747 USDC, Western District of Virginia, Charlottesville Karyn E. Drake Division Myra Byrd 2:12‐cv‐00748 USDC, Western District of North Carolina 2:12‐cv‐00749 Jennifer D. Van Rensburg USDC, Western District of Texas 2:12‐cv‐00755 Cheryl Lankston USDC, Southern District of Texas, Houston Division 2:12‐cv‐00756 Dee Woolsey USDC, Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division 2:12‐cv‐00757 USDC, Northern District of Georgia or Northern District Barbara Jean Bridges of Indiana 2:12‐cv‐00759 USDC, Northern District of New York, Plattsburgh Diane Matott Division 2:12‐cv‐00760 Lois Durham USDC, Western District of Arkansas, Texarkana Division 2:12‐cv‐00762 Janet D. Jones USDC, Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division 2:12‐cv‐00765 Rachel Taylor USDC, Eastern District of Kentucky, Lexington Division 2:12‐cv‐00766 Kimberly Garnto USDC, Southern District of Georgia, Dublin Division 2:12‐cv‐00768 Sandra LaBadie USDC, District of Pennsylvania, Wilkes‐Barre Division 2:12‐cv‐00769 Kimberly T. Burnham USDC, Northern District of Mississippi, Eastern Division 2:12‐cv‐00772 Harmony Minniefield USDC, Eastern District of Tennessee, Winchester Division Tina Patterson 2:12‐cv‐00773 USDC, Western District of Missouri 2:12‐cv‐00779 USDC, Western District of North Carolina, Asheville Dee McBrayer Division Wendy Hagans 2:12‐cv‐00783 USDC, Middle District of Alabama Isabel Swint 2:12‐cv‐00786 USDC, Northern District of Georgia, Newman Division Maria Eugnia Quijano 2:12‐cv‐00799 USDC, Northern District of Texas Angela Morrison 2:12‐cv‐00800 USDC, Western District of Arkansas Barbara A. Hill 2:12‐cv‐00806 USDC, Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division Mary Lee Sweeney 2:12‐cv‐00807 USDC, Western District of Michigan, Western Division 2:12‐cv‐00811 Donna Zoltowski USDC, District of South Carolina, Greenville Division 4 Plaintiff Civil Action Number Proposed Remand Jurisdiction Julie A.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT of GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION in Re
    Case 1:17-md-02800-TWT Document 739 Filed 07/22/19 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION MDL Docket No. 2800 In re: Equifax Inc. Customer No. 1:17-md-2800-TWT Data Security Breach Litigation CONSUMER ACTIONS Chief Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr. PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO DIRECT NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT TO THE CLASS Plaintiffs move for entry of an order directing notice of the proposed class action settlement the parties to this action have reached and scheduling a hearing to approve final approval of the settlement. Plaintiffs are simultaneously filing a supporting memorandum of law and its accompanying exhibits, which include the Settlement Agreement. For the reasons set forth in that memorandum, Plaintiffs respectfully request grant the Court enter the proposed order that is attached as an exhibit to this motion. The proposed order has been approved by both Plaintiffs and Defendants. For ease of reference, the capitalized terms in this motion and the accompanying memorandum have the meaning set forth in the Settlement Agreement. Case 1:17-md-02800-TWT Document 739 Filed 07/22/19 Page 2 of 7 Respectfully submitted this 22nd day of July, 2019. /s/ Kenneth S. Canfield Kenneth S. Canfield Ga Bar No. 107744 DOFFERMYRE SHIELDS CANFIELD & KNOWLES, LLC 1355 Peachtree Street, N.E. Suite 1725 Atlanta, Georgia 30309 Tel. 404.881.8900 kcanfield@dsckd.com /s/ Amy E. Keller Amy E. Keller DICELLO LEVITT GUTZLER LLC Ten North Dearborn Street Eleventh Floor Chicago, Illinois 60602 Tel. 312.214.7900 akeller@dicellolevitt.com /s/ Norman E.
    [Show full text]
  • ETT COLLECTION New.Xlsx
    Current Employee Timetable Summary - September 2021 Page 1 of 12 RAILROAD RR DIVISION CURRENT CURRENT ETT ETT DATE ADIRONDACK ADIX SYSTEM 10 6/1/2021 ADRIAN & BLISSFIELD ADBF SYSTEM 3 2/1/2006 ALABAMA & FLORIDA AFLR SYSTEM 3 1/1/2011 ALASKA ARRC SYSTEM 140 6/6/2016 ALEXANDER ARC SYSTEM 2 1/1/1992 ALLEGHANY VALLEY/ SOUTHWEST AVR SYSTEM 2 7/1/2009 PENNSYLVANIA/CAMP CHASE ALTON & SOUTHERN ALS SYSTEM 6 11/1/2017 AMTRAK AMTK AIR BRAKE & TRAIN HANDLING RULES & 7/31/2019 INSTRUCTION (AMT-3) AMTRAK AMTK CHICAGO SUBDIVISION 5 8/11/2014 AMTRAK AMTK MICHIGAN SUBDIVISION 5 4/8/2019 AMTRAK AMTK NEW ORLEANS UNION PASSENGER 4 6/16/2013 TERMINAL AMTRAK AMTK NORTHEAST CORRIDOR 8 12/2/2019 AMTRAK AMTK SAFETY INSTRUCTIONS FOR 1/5/2009 TRANSPORTATION EMPLOYEES ON OR ABOUT LOCOMOTIVES, CARS or EQUIPMENT (AMT-5) AMTRAK AMTK SERVICE STANDARDS FOR TRAIN 9/23/2019 SERVICE & ON-BOARD SERVCE EMPLOYEES ANGELINA & NECHES RIVER ANR SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS 8 1/1/2000 APACHE APA SYSTEM 4/26/1996 APPALACHIA & OHIO AO SYSTEM 1 3/25/2005 APPANOOSE COUNTY COMMUNITY APNC SYSTEM 3 1/1/2013 ARCADE & ATTICA ARA SYSTEM 2 3/17/2001 ARIZONA CENTRAL AZCR SYSTEM 18 1/1/2013 ARKANSAS & MISSOURI AM SYSTEM 7 4/5/2009 ASHLAND ASRY SYSTEM 2 9/1/2008 ATLANTIC RAILWAYS ATL B&H RAIL BH SYSTEM 2 3/15/2003 BALDWIN CITY & SOUTHERN LLG (LEAVENWORTH, LAWRENCE AND GALVESTON) BAY COLONY BCLR SYSTEM 10 7/7/1998 BC RAIL BCOL PORT SUB 5 8/1/2019 BEECH MOUNTAIN BEEM SYSTEM 2 2/1/2006 BELPRE INDUSTRIAL PARKERSBURG BIP BELT RAILWAY OF CHICAGO BRC TIMETABLE & SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS 7 4/1/2020 BELT RAILWAY
    [Show full text]
  • Atlanta High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area
    U.S. Department of Justice National Drug Intelligence Center Atlanta High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Drug Market Analysis 2011 Source Summary Statement The National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC) has high confidence in this drug market analysis as it is based on multiple sources of information that have proved highly reliable in prior NDIC, law enforcement, and intelligence community reporting. Quantitative data, including seizure, eradication, and arrest statistics, were drawn from data sets maintained by federal, state, or local government agencies. Discussions of the prevalence and consequences of drug abuse are based on published reports from U.S. Government agencies and interviews with public health officials deemed reliable because of their expertise in the diagnosis and treatment of drug abuse. Trends and patterns related to drug production, trafficking, and abuse were identified through detailed analysis of coordinated counterdrug agency reporting and information. NDIC intelligence analysts and field intelligence officers obtained this information through numerous interviews with law enforcement and public health officials (federal, state, and local) in whom NDIC has a high level of confidence based on previous contact and reporting, their recognized expertise, and their professional standing and reputation within the U.S. counterdrug community. This report was reviewed and corroborated by law enforcement officials who have jurisdiction in the Atlanta High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area and possess an expert knowledge of its drug situation. U.S. Department of Justice National Drug Intelligence Center 2011-R0813-003 September 2011 Atlanta High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Drug Market Analysis 2011 This assessment is an outgrowth of a partnership between the NDIC and HIDTA Program for preparation of annual assessments depicting drug trafficking trends and developments in HIDTA Program areas.
    [Show full text]
  • CSX Nashville Division Timetable
    NASHVILLE DIVISION TIMETABLE NO. 3 EFFECTIVE SATURDAY, JANUARY 1, 2005 AT 0001 HOURS CSX STANDARD TIME J. M. Dyer General Manager . NASHVILLE DIVISION TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL INFORMATION DIVISION SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS PAGE INST DESCRIPTION PAGE Table of Contents Timetable Legend 1 Instructions Relating to Operating Rules Sample Subdivision 2 Instructions Relating to Safety Rules Region and Division Officers Instructions Relating to Company Policies 3 Region and Division Telephone Numbers and Procedures Emergency Assistance Instructions Relating to Equipment 4 Train Dispatchers Handling Rules Instructions Relating to Air Brake and Train SUBDIVISIONS 5 Handling Rules NAME CODE DISP PAGE 6 Equipment Restrictions Bruceton BC AY 7 Miscellaneous CE&D CP SB Chattanooga C8 AJ Danville DA IB Decatur DC SB Evansville Terminal EV SB Henderson HE SA Memphis Terminal MX AY Memphis MP AY Nashville NV AH Nashville Terminal NA AJ O&N ON SA S&NA North SN AH St. Louis SL SB CSX Transportation Effective January 1, 2005 Nashville Division Timetable No. 3 © Copyright 2005 TIMETABLE LEGEND GENERAL F. AUTH FOR MOVE (AUTHORITY FOR MOVEMENT) Unless otherwise indicated on subdivision pages, the The rules under which the subdivision is operated (CSX Rules Train Dispatcher controls all Main Tracks, Sidings, or NORAC Rules) are listed in a shaded, bordered box at the Interlockings, Controlled Points and Yard Limits. top of this column. The authority for movement rules applicable to the subdivision are listed below this box. STATION LISTING AND DIAGRAM PAGES G. NOTES 1 – HEADING Where station page information may need to be further The subdivision is identified by name and by 2 letter defined, a note will refer to “STATION PAGE NOTES” listed at identifier the end of the diagram.
    [Show full text]
  • CSX Atlanta Division Timetable
    ATLANTA DIVISION TIMETABLE NO. 3 EFFECTIVE SATURDAY, JANUARY 1, 2005 AT 0001 HOURS CSX STANDARD TIME G. S. Kovar Division Manager . TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL INFORMATION DIVISION SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS DESCRIPTION PAGE INST DESCRIPTION PAGE 1 Instructions Relating to Operating Rules 101 Table of Contents i Timetable Legend ii 2 InstructionsRelating to Safety Rules 101 Legend – Sample Subdivision iii Division Officers iv Instructions Relating to Company Policies 3 101 Emergency Telephone Numbers vi And Procedures Train Dispatchers vii Instructions Relating to Equipment 4 101 SUBDIVISIONS Handling Rules SUBDIVISION NAME CODE DISP PAGE Instructions Relating to Air Brake and Train 5 101 A&WP AW CN 1 Handling Rules Abbeville AV AF 7 Atlanta Terminal AA BG 11 6 Instructions Relating to Restricted 101 Birmingham Mineral YB AY 29 Equipment Rules Boyles Terminal BU AH 35 Camak CA BE 41 7 Miscellaneous 101 Cartersville ZA AI 43 Etowah ET AI 45 Gainesville Midland GM AE 51 Georgia GA BE 53 Lineville LN CN 59 M&M MM AG 67 Manchester MS BG 75 NO&M NM AG 79 PD PD AB 89 S&NA South SS AH 91 W&A WA AI 95 CSX Transportation Effective January 1, 2005 Atlanta Division Timetable No. 3 © Copyright 2005 TIMETABLE LEGEND GENERAL F. AUTH FOR MOVE (AUTHORITY FOR MOVEMENT) Unless otherwise indicated on subdivision pages, the The authority for movement rules applicable to the subdivision train dispatcher controls all main tracks, sidings, are listed below this box. Interlockings, controlled points and yard limits G. NOTES Where station page information may need to be further STATION LISTING AND DIAGRAM PAGES defined, a note will refer to “STATION PAGE NOTES” listed at the end of the diagram.
    [Show full text]
  • United States District Court Northern District of Georgia Atlanta Division
    Case 1:17-md-02800-TWT Document 189 Filed 02/02/18 Page 1 of 36 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION In re: Equifax, Inc. Customer MDL Docket No. 2800 Data Security Breach Litigation No. 1:17-md-2800-TWT This document relates to: Chief Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr. FINANCIAL INSTITUTION ACTIONS APPLICATION OF THE “CUNA/ICBA GROUP” TO SERVE AS CO-LEAD COUNSEL, CO-LIAISON COUNSEL, AND PLAINTIFFS’ STEERING COMMITTEE FOR THE FINANCIAL INSTITUTION PLAINTIFFS Case 1:17-md-02800-TWT Document 189 Filed 02/02/18 Page 2 of 36 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................1 II. BACKGROUND .............................................................................................4 III. ARGUMENT ...................................................................................................6 A. The CUNA/ICBA Group Has Committed, and Will Continue to Commit, Substantial Time and Resources to this Action ................. 6 B. The CUNA/ICBA Group Has Worked, and Will Continue to Work, Cooperatively to Achieve Success in this Action ...................... 7 C. The CUNA/ICBA Group Has Substantial Experience Successfully Litigating Complex Actions, Including Data Breach Class Actions ....................................................................9 1. The Proposed Co-Lead Counsel ...............................................10 2. The Proposed Co-Liaison Counsel ...........................................13 3. The Proposed Steering
    [Show full text]
  • Atlanta High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area
    ARCHIVED U.S. Department of Justice National Drug Intelligence Center Atlanta High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Drug Market Analysis 2010 This document may contain dated information. It has been made available to provide access to historical materials. ARCHIVED This document may contain dated information. It has been made available to provide access to historical materials. ARCHIVED U.S. Department of Justice National Drug Intelligence Center 2010-R0813-003 May 2010 Atlanta High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Drug Market Analysis 2010 This assessment is an outgrowth of a partnership between the NDIC and HIDTA Program for preparation of annual assessments depicting drug trafficking trends and developments in HIDTA Program areas. The report has been coordinated with the HIDTA, is limited in scope to HIDTA jurisdictional boundaries, and draws upon a wide variety of sources within those boundaries. This document may contain dated information. It has been made available to provide access to historical materials. ARCHIVED ii Atlanta High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area This document may contain dated information. It has been made available to provide access to historical materials. ARCHIVED Table of Contents Strategic Drug Threat Developments. 1 HIDTA Overview. 3 Drug Threat Overview. 3 Drug Trafficking Organizations. 5 Production. 5 Transportation. 7 Distribution . 8 Drug-Related Crime . 9 Abuse. 10 Illicit Finance. 10 Outlook. 11 Appendix A. Table. 12 Sources . 13 Drug Market Analysis 2010 iii This document may contain dated information. It has been made available to provide access to historical materials. ARCHIVED iv Atlanta High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area This document may contain dated information. It has been made available to provide access to historical materials.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Georgia State Rail Plan Is Valid Until January 21, 2021
    2 0 1 5 GEORGIA STATE RAIL PLAN U.S. Department 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE of Transportation Washington, DC 20590 Federal Railroad Administration January 21, 2016 Russell R. McMurry, PE Commissioner Georgia Department of Transportation 1 Georgia Center, 600 W Peachtree St, NW Atlanta, GA 30308 Dear Mr. McMurry, FRA has completed its review of the Georgia State Rail Plan (SRP) from October 2015. FRA’s review of the SRP found that it contained the minimum required elements in accordance with Section 303 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA) and the 2013 State Rail Plan Guidance. This letter services as notice that FRA formally accepts the SRP and the projects listed in the SRP will be eligible for capital grants under Sections 301, 302, and 501 of PRIIA, relating to intercity passenger rail, congestion, and high speed rail respectively. FRA acceptance of the 2015 Georgia State Rail Plan is valid until January 21, 2021. FRA looks forward to partnering with the State of Georgia to continue building a rail network for America that is safer, more reliable, and more efficient. Sincerely, Adam Denton East Team Lead Table of Contents Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... I Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... I Georgia’s Rail System ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Taylor V. DC Water & Sewer Authority
    Case 1:01-cv-00561-HHK-AK Document 120-3 Filed 09/16/05 Page 1 of 35 ANALYSIS OF COMPENSATION FROM 1999-2001 AT THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY Prepared for Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, LLP Washington, D.C. Prepared by Paul F. White, Ph.D. ERS Group Washington, D.C. September 15, 2005 Case 1:01-cv-00561-HHK-AK Document 120-3 Filed 09/16/05 Page 2 of 35 ANALYSIS OF COMPENSATION FROM 1999-2001 AT THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY I. Introduction This analysis was undertaken at the request of Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, LLP. ERS Group was asked to review the analysis of the plaintiffs' expert witness and to conduct an analysis of compensation levels at the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority (WASA). I am a Director of ERS Group in Washington, D.C. ERS Group is a consulting and research firm whose professionals work with individuals, government agencies, universities, corporations and other businesses to analyze employment decision-making processes. My primary field of research is in the area of employment discrimination. ERS Group charges $325 per hour for my services. A detailed list of my credentials and the list of cases in which I have given testimony are outlined in Exhibit A of this report. This report is organized as follows: Section II lists the data sources that I have reviewed in preparation of this report. Section III discusses the methodology behind my analyses. Section IV presents the results of the statistical analyses. Section V provides comments on the plaintiffs' expert's analyses.
    [Show full text]
  • Alabama Division Timetable.Pdf
    ALABAMA DIVISION SOUTHERN REGION TIMETABLE NUMBER 1 EFFECTIVE MARCH 15, 2018 1 ALABAMA DIVISION TIMETABLE TABLE OF CONTENTS COMMITTED TO I. Timetable General Information..................................................3 SAFETY a. Train Dispatcher Contact Information……………………..4 b. Station Page.........................................................................5 c. Explanation of Characters..................................................5 d. Diesel Unit Groups..............................................................6 e. Main Track Control..............................................................6 DOUBLE ZEROS f. Division Special Instructions.............................................6 II. Alabama Division Station Page Table of Contents ..................7 III. District and Terminal Special Instructions………………...8-258 IV. Alabama Division Special Instructions….......................260-263 ZERO INJURIES ZERO INCIDENTS 2 ALABAMA DIVISION TIMETABLE TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Timetable General Information..................................................3 a. Train Dispatcher Contact Information……………………..4 b. Station Page.........................................................................5 c. Explanation of Characters..................................................5 d. Diesel Unit Groups..............................................................6 e. Main Track Control..............................................................6 f. Division Special Instructions.............................................6 II. Alabama
    [Show full text]
  • Hooters V. La Cima.Pdf
    Case 1:11-cv-03299-SCJ Document 1 Filed 09/28/11 Page 1 of 26 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) HOOTERS OF AMERICA, LLC, ) ) PLAINTIFF, ) v. ) ) CIVIL ACTION FILE LA CIMA RESTAURANTS, ) LLC, ) NO. ______________ ) DEFENDANT. ) ) ) COMPLAINT Plaintiff Hooters of America, LLC (“HOA” or the “Company”) brings this action for legal damages and equitable relief against Defendant La Cima Restaurants, LLC (“La Cima”). As set forth in the factual recitation below, La Cima, a direct competitor of HOA, has violated myriad federal and state laws by misappropriating sensitive trade secrets and other confidential and proprietary information of the Company, and putting such wrongfully acquired information to improper competitive use. Joseph W. Hummel (“Hummel”), a former executive of HOA and now a Partner and Chief Operating Officer of La Cima, gained unauthorized access to HOA’s computer systems, misappropriated HOA’s trade Case 1:11-cv-03299-SCJ Document 1 Filed 09/28/11 Page 2 of 26 secrets and confidential business information, and shared such information with La Cima. Because HOA has been and will continue to be severely, immediately, and irreparably harmed by La Cima’s use of its most sensitive business information, HOA respectfully requests that this Court grant the relief it now seeks. PARTIES 1. HOA, the corporate successor to Hooters of America, Inc., is a Georgia Limited Liability Company, with its headquarters and principal place of business at 1815 The Exchange, Atlanta, Georgia. 2. La Cima is a Georgia Limited Liability Company, with its principal place of business at 2060 Mount Paran Road NW, Suite 106, Atlanta, Georgia.
    [Show full text]
  • Domestic Field Directory 131226 U.S
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file, please contact us at NCJRS.gov. I t. Department of Justice rug Enforcement Administration perations Division Drug Enforcement Administration Domestic Field Directory 131226 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the National Institute of Justice. Permission to reproduce this sp;:ZjFl8tl material has been gr~~~ic Domain/DBA/Operations DivrsTImjUS-DBPt-.----o:rIJUs-t-rce- to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permis­ sion ofthe~owner. r I' INDEX Atlanta Field Division ••••• • • 0 • ~ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee Bo s ton Field Division. .. .. .. .. .. .. 3 Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont Chic ago Fie ld Division ••••••••••••••• . .. .. .. .. .. 4 III i no is Indiana, Minnesota, North Dakota, Wisconsin Dallas Field Division ••••••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Q • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 5 Texas (Northern), Oklahoma Denver Field Division •. .. o • • • ~ • • • • • G • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 6 Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming Detroit Field Division. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • eo. • • • • • • • • • • • 7 Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio Houston
    [Show full text]