The court has consolidated the case BEATON v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al with the case BLACKWELL et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al, which is identified by docket number 3:26-cv-05022. This consolidation will allow the two cases to be heard together, potentially streamlining the litigation process. The consolidation is significant because it may impact the overall strategy and outcome of the cases.
No timeline activity recorded yet. This page will grow as rulings and filings land.
Court
D.N.J.
District of New Jersey · 3rd Circuit · NJ
Docket
Not captured
Civil
Stage
Active litigation
Active
Filed
Date unavailable
Not in the available feed
Latest Filing
2:26-cv-04963 Guannan Shi et al v. M&D Regional Center, LLC et al
Other · May 08, 2026
Coverage
16 articles
2 sources tracked
Participants
2 Defendants, 8 Plaintiffs
18 linked entities
Judge
Not assigned in feed
This case is tied to District of New Jersey, a federal district court in NJ.
The newest docket activity we have is a other dated May 08, 2026.
The visible party/entity graph currently includes JOHNSON & JOHNSON, M&D Regional Center, LLC, 3:26-cv-04988 CALZADA-NARVAEZ and others.
Press monitoring has found 16 related articles from 2 distinct sources.
BEATON v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al is an active civil matter in District of New Jersey under docket 26-cv-04963.
The main identified plaintiff or petitioner is 2:26-cv-04963 Guannan Shi, 3:26-cv-04985 JOCKISCH, and 3:26-cv-04988 CALZADA-NARVAEZ. The case is currently organized around Current docket activity and next procedural step, Settlement posture and dismissal risk, Federal jurisdiction and procedural posture.
The available docket gives enough signal to track the case, but not enough to overstate the merits. This page will become more useful as filings, orders, hearings, and party appearances add detail.
On May 8, 2026, the docket recorded a other: 2:26-cv-04963 Guannan Shi et al v. M&D Regional Center, LLC et al. On May 4, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The court has consolidated the case BEATON v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al with the case BLACKWELL et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al, which is identified by docket number 3:26-cv-05022. This consolidation will allow the two cases to be heard together, potentially.
On May 4, 2026, the docket recorded a other: Judge Atwell Jr. presided over a related case, 3:26-cv-05021 ATWELL JR. et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al. This case is connected to the main case, BEATON v. The judge's actions in this case will likely impact the outcome of the main case.
On May 4, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The court has consolidated the case of BONNEY et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al with the case of BEATON v. This consolidation will allow the two cases to be heard together, potentially streamlining the litigation process.
The.
The next thing to watch is whether the latest other produces a substantive order, a scheduling change, a settlement signal, or a filing that clarifies the parties' positions.
District of New Jersey (D.N.J.) is a federal district court in the 3rd Circuit, NJ.
2:26-cv-04963 Guannan Shi et al v. M&D Regional Center, LLC et al.
The court has consolidated the case BEATON v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al with the case BLACKWELL et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al, which is identified by docket number 3:26-cv-05022. This consolidation will allow the two cases to be heard together, potentially streamlining the litigation process. The consolidation is significant because it may impact the overall strategy and outcome of the cases.
Judge Atwell Jr. presided over a related case, 3:26-cv-05021 ATWELL JR. et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al. This case is connected to the main case, BEATON v. The judge's actions in this case will likely impact the outcome of the main case.
The court has consolidated the case of BONNEY et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al with the case of BEATON v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al. This consolidation will allow the two cases to be heard together, potentially streamlining the litigation process. The consolidation is significant because it may impact the overall strategy and outcome of the cases.
The court has consolidated the case of Beaton v. Johnson & Johnson et al with another case, 3:26-cv-05015 FIEN et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al. This consolidation will allow the two cases to be heard together, potentially streamlining the litigation process. The consolidation is significant because it may impact the overall strategy and outcome of the cases.
The parties filed a joint stipulation.
The court has consolidated the case of Williams v. Johnson & Johnson et al with Beaton v. Johnson & Johnson et al, indicating that the two cases will be heard together. This consolidation is likely due to the similar nature of the cases, which both involve claims against Johnson & Johnson. The consolidation will streamline the proceedings and potentially reduce the overall cost of the litigation.
The court has consolidated the case of BEATON v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al with the case of HARRISON v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al, creating a single case with multiple plaintiffs. This consolidation will streamline the litigation process and allow the court to manage the cases more efficiently. The consolidation affects the case number, which is now 3:26-cv-04998.
The court granted a motion to consolidate the case RICH et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al with the case BEATON v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al. This consolidation will allow the two cases to be heard together, potentially streamlining the litigation process. The consolidation affects the case 3:26-cv-04995.
The court granted a motion to consolidate the case of BENTKOWSKI-DYLONG et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al with BEATON v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al. This consolidation will allow the two cases to be heard together, potentially streamlining the litigation process. The consolidation is significant because it will impact the overall strategy and timeline of the cases.
A new case, Calzada-Narvaez et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al, was filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, with case number 3:26-cv-04988. This case is related to the ongoing litigation surrounding Johnson & Johnson's products. The filing of this new case is a development in the ongoing legal battle.
The court granted a motion to consolidate the case with another case, 3:26-cv-04986 JENKINS et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al, filed against Johnson & Johnson and other defendants. This consolidation will allow the court to manage the cases more efficiently and potentially streamline the discovery process. The consolidation is significant because it will impact the overall timeline and strategy of the litigation.
The court has allowed a new case, JOCKISCH et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al, to proceed, which is related to the ongoing BEATON v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al case. This new case involves similar allegations against Johnson & Johnson. The court's decision allows the new case to move forward, potentially adding more claims against the defendants.
A new case, Martin et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al, was filed in the court, potentially adding to the existing litigation surrounding Johnson & Johnson. This case may involve similar claims as Beaton v. Johnson & Johnson et al. The filing of this new case could impact the overall scene of the litigation.
A new case, Hicks v. Johnson & Johnson et al, was filed in the same court as Beaton v. Johnson & Johnson et al, indicating a potential consolidation or coordination of similar lawsuits. This development may impact the progress of Beaton v. Johnson & Johnson et al. The exact implications are unclear at this time.
The court denied a motion to dismiss in the case of Beaton v. Johnson & Johnson et al, allowing the lawsuit to proceed. The motion was filed by the defendants, who were seeking to dismiss the case due to alleged lack of evidence. The court's decision means that the plaintiffs' claims against Johnson & Johnson and other defendants will move forward.
Notice to Counsel Re: Consent to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge - optional html form ( 19
Stipulation of Dismissal (aty) ( 28
Sources tracked
2 outlets · 16 articles
Timeline events
16 records on file
Last updated
1 hour, 51 minutes ago
Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.