In In re Processed Egg Products Antitrust Litigation, No. 08-md-02002 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 17, 2014), the district court interpreted the contours of its Fed. R. Evid. (“FRE”) 502(d) order in the context of multi-district litigation.  The court entered an order pursuant to its authority under FRE 502(d), which provides that a federal court may order that privilege is not waived by disclosure connected with the litigation pending before the court, and thus, the disclosure also is not a waiver in any other federal or state proceeding.  Here, certain defendants settled with plaintiff “DPPs,” and agreed to provide certain privileged documents to the DPPs.  Other plaintiffs argued that the Order did not apply to productions which did not include the entire MDL, and as a consequence, the DPPs’ use of the documents waived privilege.  The court acknowledged that the FRE 502(d) Order was ambiguous regarding whether only MDL-wide disclosures were protected by the Order, or whether a more limited production could also qualify for protection.  The court nonetheless held that the Order applied to disclosures to less than all MDL participants.  The court explained that, in the interest of efficiency, it had entered a single order to cover multiple cases.  “[T]he decision to manage multiple cases within the form of a multidistrict litigation does not mean that the individual cases lose all independence from one another.”  The court contemplated that there could be negotiated settlements involving disclosures between certain, but not all, plaintiffs and certain, but not all, defendants, and that those disclosures would not be shared with other plaintiffs and defendants.  The court warned, however, that the FRE 502(d) Order did not give parties “a blank check” to disseminate privileged information to the public or to share privileged information with those not covered by the court’s Order without waiving privilege.  The recipients’ use  of the privileged information was limited to their “absorption of the information and reliance on the documents in determining future actions in this litigation.  That is, [plaintiff recipients] can inspect the ostensibly privileged documents, considertheir import, and use them in determining future action.”