Addressing an issue of first impression, the Ninth Circuit held in Romo v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., No. 13-56310 (Sept. 25, 2013), that a plaintiff’s petition for coordination of state actions pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 404 did not constitute a proposal for the actions to be tried jointly under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA). CAFA authorizes removal of “mass actions,” defined as “any civil action . . . in which monetary relief claims of 100 or more persons are proposed to be tried jointly on the ground that the plaintiffs’ claims involve common questions of law or fact.” 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(11)(B)(i). Distinguishing a Seventh Circuit decision that involved the consolidation of actions, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the section 404 petition focused on coordination of pretrial matters rather than trial. Therefore, the petition did not constitute a proposal to try the cases jointly and removal to federal court was not authorized under CAFA.