Is There Commonality In a Case Regarding Suppression of Information on Health Hazards of Smoking If Individual Claims Injuries from Different Products and Other Cases Related to the Tobacco Industry ? In Chamberlain v. the American Tobacco Co., Case No. 1:96 CV 2005, (N.D. Ohio April 12, 1999), the plaintiffs asserted a very similar complaint to that of Plaintiffs' herein, except that it related to the tobacco industry's suppression of information on the health hazards of smoking. Many of the causes of action were the same as they are herein, and the plaintiffs attempted to rely on the tobacco industry's course of conduct to establish commonality. The court found that there was no commonality in the case because the plaintiffs claimed injuries from different products. The court noted that the defendants had produced and sold different brands of cigarettes containing different levels of tar and nicotine over time. Id. The court further found that commonality was lacking where each claim alleged by the plaintiffs turned on issues of reliance, causation and damages that were particular to each class member.