In re CBS Color Tube Patent Litigation, 69.

• Court: Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
• Writing for the Court: PER CURIAM
• Citation: In re CBS Color Tube Patent Litigation, 342 F.Supp. 1403 (J.P.M.L. 1972)
• Decision Date: 16 May 1972
• Docket Number: No. 69.,69.
• Parties: In re CBS COLOR TUBE PATENT LITIGATION. COLUMBIA BROADCASTING SYSTEM v. ZENITH RADIO CORP. and The Rauland Corp., (N.D.Ill. 71 C 687) D. Mass. Civil Action No. 69-4.

342 F. Supp. 1403

In re CBS COLOR TUBE PATENT LITIGATION COLUMBIA BROADCASTING SYSTEM v. ZENITH RADIO CORP. and The Rauland Corp., (N.D.Ill. 71 C 687) D. Mass. Civil Action No. 69-4.

No. 69.

Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.

May 16, 1972.

Before ALFRED P. MURRAH, Chairman, and JOHN MINOR WISDOM^*, EDWARD WEINFELD, EDWIN A. ROBSON, WILLIAM H. BECKER^*, JOSEPH S. LORD, III, and STANLEY A. WEIGEL, Judges of the Panel.

OPINION AND ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Columbia Broadcasting System ("CBS") brought a patent infringement suit in the Northern District of Illinois against Zenith Radio Corporation and The Rauland Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Zenith. Defendants filed a counterclaim under the Declaratory Judgment Act asking that the patents in suit be declared invalid and not infringed. Pursuant to a previous determination, the Panel transferred the Illinois action to the District of Massachusetts for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings before Chief Judge Andrew A. Caffrey.¹ Defendants have moved the Panel for remand of the Zenith case to the Northern District of Illinois for further pretrial proceedings and trial. We deny defendants' motion for remand.

All but two of the patent infringement actions brought by CBS and consolidated for pretrial proceedings under Section 1407 have settled. Only the Zenith case and an action against Northeastern Distributors, Inc. (Zenith's exclusive distributor) remain before Judge Caffrey. And defendants assert that, under existing case law, the action brought by CBS against Northeastern is governed, as to outcome, by the main litigation between CBS (the patentee) and Zenith (the alleged infringing manufacturer). Thus, defendants argue that the CBS Color Tube Patent Litigation has ceased to be "multidistrict litigation" and that remand at this time will afford the judge who will ultimately try the case the opportunity to supervise the remaining discovery and become familiar with the litigation.

CBS opposes the motion for remand. CBS has a motion pending before Judge Caffrey to have the counterclaim filed by defendants in the Northern District of Illinois severed and transferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) to the District of Massachusetts for trial. It argues that Judge Caffrey should be allowed the opportunity to dispose of that motion before the question of remand is decided by the Panel. We agree.

A transferee judge under Section 1407 has the responsibility for all pretrial proceedings in litigation assigned to him and the motion before Judge Caffrey is certainly a "pretrial" motion.² In view of the pendency of that motion, we expressly refrain from granting this motion for remand and interfering in matters within the discretion of the transferee judge.³ Furthermore, we are not convinced by defendants' arguments that an action, in which discovery is not yet completed, should be remanded simply because all...