On October 24, 2019, the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) issued a draft guidance addressing textured breast implants that have been linked to breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (“BIA-ALCL”).”
On October 3, 2019, Plaintiffs in several pending class actions made a motion before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, to centralize related Allergan Biocell textured breast implants lawsuits in a Multidistrict Litigation. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) is a panel of appellate and district court judges that determine whether or not to create an MDL. A Multidistrict Litigation (“MDL”) is a procedure whereby qualifying cases filed in federal district courts throughout the nation are consolidated in one federal district court, before a single judge. If an MDL is created, the JPML then selects the district court and assigns a judge to preside over the litigation.
How Do I Know If I Have a Hernia Mesh Claim?
STEP 1: Obtain Medical Records
The first step in figuring out whether you have a potential hernia mesh claim is to confirm which type of hernia mesh you had implanted. There is a simple way to do that. Whenever doctors use a medical implant or device, like hernia mesh, it comes in its own shiny new box (as you can imagine, a lot of marketing goes into the packaging of these expensive products). The box has stickers on it that specifically identify everything about the mesh (manufacturer, model, lot number, etc.). The surgeon takes the sticker off of the box and attaches it to the Operative Report. Consisting of only a few pages, the Operative Report is a basic summary of your hernia mesh implant operation. The stickers are usually attached to the last page of the Operative Report. You can go to your medical provider and ask for your Operative Report (this should only take you a couple of days), or you can retain an attorney to formally request your operative report (this will take a few weeks).
On April 17, 2019, Judge Sargus, who is overseeing the Bard Hernia Mesh MDL in the Southern District of Ohio, held a Case Management Conference. At the time of the conference, the Court noted that there were just over 1,700 cases filed in the MDL, with approximately 80-100 new cases being filed each week. The parties advised that the protocol and schedule for conducting various depositions were still being discussed, including the depositions of the treating physicians, corporate designees, and company witnesses. Paper discovery from defendants is also still being produced and reviewed by Plaintiffs’ leadership. Another conference is scheduled for early June.
Currently, there are more than 10,000 IVC filter cases filed across the country, in state and federal courts, with a majority being filed against manufacturers, Bard Medical and Cook Medical. IVC filters are small devices surgically implanted into the inferior vena cava in an effort to catch blood clots (where they should naturally dissolve) before they travel to the lungs, causing a potentially fatal pulmonary embolism. The Bard MDL (multidistrict litigation) is venued in the District of Arizona, while the Cook MDL is venued in the Southern District of Indiana. Additionally, lawsuits are being filed against Boston Scientific for its Greenfield Vena Cava Filter in Ohio; as well as Rex Medical and Argon Medical for their Option and Option Elite IVC Filters in Pennsylvania.
We have already written about the thousands of Bard hernia mesh cases pending in Rhode Island state court moving swiftly towards bellwether trials. Not to be outdone, the federal Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) cases in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, before Judge Edmund A. Sargus, are heating up as well.
The MDL encompasses claims against C.R. Bard and its corporate subsidiary, Davol, based upon allegations that Bard’s polypropylene hernia mesh was defective and caused injuries to patients. Even though the MDL was formed in August 2018, the Court has already put together an aggressive procedure and schedule for bellwether cases.
You have seen a lot of commercials and have probably been searching the internet for some straightforward explanations about hernia mesh lawsuits.
Very simply, a hernia is when a piece of internal tissue pushes through an opening in the flesh meant to contain that tissue. As you can imagine, this can be very painful. Hernias have many different causes, such as weakness in certain parts of the body (like muscle weakness), overexertion (like lifting heavy things), or lifestyle effects (like obesity). The most common types of hernias occur at the: inner groin (inguinal), thigh/outer groin (femoral), belly button (umbilical), upper stomach/diaphragm (hiatal), or an incision site (ventral). So, hernias are very common in just about every type of person.
Thousands of individuals have filed Bard mesh lawsuits against Bard and its corporate subsidiary, Davol. The Bard Hernia Mesh litigation, is currently pending in Rhode Island state court, as well as in federal court, in the Southern District of Ohio. The Rhode Island state court litigation began in late 2017, while the federal court litigation in Ohio was only formed in August 2018. Because both litigations are still relatively young, the litigations are expected to continue throughout at least 2019, if not longer.
There is a pending application in the Hernia Mesh litigation in New Jersey state court to have the litigation designated as a multicounty litigation (MCL). An MCL would permit centralized management of all related cases filed throughout New Jersey.
The MCL parameters proposed by the application would encompass all cases related sixty-two cases currently pending…
The sixth pelvic mesh product liability trial against Ethicon, Inc., a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary, is underway in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. The lawsuit alleges that the plaintiff was injured by Ethicon’s TVT Secur pelvic mesh product, requiring her to undergo multiple corrective surgeries and removal of mesh fragments from her urethra. The plaintiff alleges that the defective pelvic mesh product has caused perforations to her urethra, incontinence, and pain. The complaint alleges design defect and a failure to warn.
Citing the recent United States Supreme Court decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court of California (BMS), Ethicon, Inc. argued that the company’s lack of tangible links to Pennsylvania prevented the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas from hearing pelvic mesh cases. Ninety of the cases filed in the Philadelphia court that alleging injuries caused by defective pelvic mesh implants were filed by out-of-state residents.