Dr Shezad Malik Law Firm has offices based in Fort Worth and Dallas and represents people who have suffered catastrophic and serious personal injuries including wrongful death, caused by the negligence or recklessness of others. We specialize in Personal Injury trial litigation and focus our energy and efforts on those we represent.

According to a recent Bloomberg news article, Johnson & Johnson (J&J) has begun to settle thousands of personal injury and product liability lawsuits filed by women who blame the company’s vaginal-mesh inserts for causing severe injuries.

Trans Vaginal Mesh AttorneyFirst of Many Johnson and Johnson Ethicon Settlements

The world’s largest medical-device maker has agreed to pay more than $120 million to settle an initial round of about 3,000 lawsuits where women suffered serious organ damage from erosion of their popular line of vaginal mesh surgical inserts.

Settlement “A Drop in the Ocean”

According to court documents and SEC regulatory filings, the company is exposed to than 42,400 injury and product liability lawsuits. The company has not disclosed the average individual injury settlement values. Settlement values will vary according to severity of the injuries and the number of corrective surgeries required to fix the problems. This settlement is the first of presumably many, that J&J and its Ethicon unit have agreed to settle.

Trans Vaginal Mesh Litigation Update

J&J is exposed to the most mesh injury claims, in the vaginal-mesh litigation, which began in 2011. According to experts it is estimated that the total number of claims exceeds 100,000 lawsuits against more than a 6 major mesh device manufacturers.

The mesh is still available and is still being used by many gynecologists to treat vaginal uterine prolapse and urinary incontinence. The vaginal mesh and bladder incontinence slings have not been withdrawn globally from the market, despite the tsunami of lawsuits.

The companies under fire in this massive mesh debacle include Boston Scientific Corp. and C.R. Bard Inc. who have settled some cases while setting aside more than $1 billion to deal with claims over inserts. Vaginal mesh inserts are used to surgically treat vaginal prolapse and urinary incontinence.

Women allege that Ethicon’s inserts shrink once implanted, causing internal organ damage, erosion, recurrent prolapse, urinary incontinence and constant pain. J&J agreed in June 2012 to pull some lines off the market.

FDA Labels Mesh as “High Risk”

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2012 ordered J&J, Boston Scientific, Bard and others to report rates of organ damage and complications linked to the implants. Recently, the FDA tightened regulations involving mesh inserts after finding they should be classified as higher-risk products when used to treat vaginal prolapse.

Multi Million Dollar Jury Verdicts

State juries in Texas, New Jersey, and California have found J&J and Ethicon liable for injuries associated with the vaginal inserts. A Philadelphia state jury recently hammered J&J and Ethicon to pay $12.5 million to a woman who said Ethicon’s Prolift mesh damaged her bladder.

J&J and Ethicon company has also won several trials, including a 2014 case brought in West Virginia over mesh used to treat incontinence.

Federal MDL Consolidation

U.S. District Judge Joseph Goodwin in Charleston, West Virginia, is overseeing mesh cases, which has been consolidated in Charleston, West Virginia federal court since 2012.

Boston Scientific faces 30,000 mesh suits, according to a November SEC regulatory filing. In April, Boston Scientific agreed to pay $119 million to settle 3,000 cases in its first substantial settlement.

Bard in an October SEC filing disclosed that it faced 12,850 mesh suits after settling about 6,400 cases. Bard agreed in August to pay more than $200 million to resolve at least 3,000 cases.

The case is In Re Ethicon Inc. Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation, 12-MDL-2327, U.S. District Court, Southern District of West Virginia (Charleston).

Oren Fells from Georgia recently filed a Xarelto uncontrollable intracranial or brain bleeding lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. The lawsuit was filed against Bayer Healthcare, Johnson & Johnson, and its Janssen subsidiary, the manufacturers of Xarelto.

Xarelto Injury LawsuitsCatastrophic Xarelto Brain Bleeding Allegations

Fells began taking the newer anticoagulant or blood thinner Xarelto in 2013, for the treatment of atrial fibrillation, a common heart rthym problem. Fells suffered a brain bleed in January, 2014, causing him to develop life long permanent injuries.

Many lawsuits have been filed against Xarelto’s manufacturers,  Bayer and Johnson & Johnson and the plaintiffs claim that the companies failed to warn patients and doctors about the risks associated with Xarelto and the lack of an antidote to help stop the bleeding.

What is Xarelto?

Xarelto (rivaroxoaban) was FDA approved in 2011 as an alternative for Coumadin (warfarin), which has been the gold standard anticoagulant treatment for the past 60 years. Xarelto is one of several new-generation blood thinners, which have been promoted as easier to use than warfarin. Unfortunately, several thousand Xarelto bleeding problems have been reported since the medication was used.

Xarelto Federal MDL Litigation

According to the latest federal court census, there are almost 2,500 lawsuits filed, alleging that Xarelto caused patients to develop serious bleeding injuries. The Xarelto litigation is consolidated and centralized before U.S. District Judge Eldon Fallon in the Eastern District of Louisiana as part of Multidistrict litigation (MDL) since December 2014.

Lawsuits against Bayer and Johnson & Johnson are consolidated in two courts, a multidistrict litigation court in the Eastern District of Louisiana and a mass tort litigation court in Philadelphia.

As is common in pharmaceutical multi-district litigation, a small group of Xarelto injury cases are scheduled to go through case-specific discovery and be set for early test trials, these are known as “bellwether trials.”

4 Xarelto Bellwether Trials Set

Judge Fallon set a series of four bellwether trials to go before juries in the Spring of 2017. The number of Xarelto lawsuits continue to increase and be filed by individuals across the United States, alleging severe and deadly bleeding complications.

Bellwether Trials in Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas

The first two trials will be held in the Eastern District of Louisiana, on February 6 and March 13, 2017. The third trial will be held in Mississippi on April 24, 2017 and the fourth trial will be held in Texas on May 30, 2017.

According to Judge Fallon’s order, the cases that will go before juries on these dates will be pulled from a pool of 40 lawsuits to be selected in January 2016. These cases will be trial ready, with case-specific discovery, including depositions of plaintiffs, prescribing doctors, treating physicians and sales representatives of the drug makers.

Pradaxa MDL Settlement

Pradaxa, the first new-generation anticoagulant to hit the market was also exposed to several thousand bleeding complication lawsuits. More than 4,000 Pradaxa injury lawsuits were filed, and Boehringer Ingleheim, the manufacturer agreed to settle the claims without any trials and paid $650 million in Pradaxa settlements, with an average of about $150,000 per claim.

Michael G. Fitzpatrick, representative of the 8th district of Pennsylvania, has asked the FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations, to investigate whether three hospitals violated mandatory reporting policies in wrongful deaths related to the use of power morcellators during gynecological surgery.

Uterine_Cancer_Hysterectomy_AttorneyBrigham and Women’s Hospital (of Boston); Rochester General Hospital; and the University of Rochester Medical Center are implicated in failing to report these surgical deaths, that were likely related to the use of morcellators at the hospital as part of surgical procedures there.

What are Power Morcellators?

Power morcellators are surgical medical devices that are used to grind up uterine tissue for easy removal during minimally invasive laparoscopic surgeries, during hysterectomies and myomectomies (removal of uterine fibroid tumors).

The use of these grinder devices has come under close scrutiny and warnings, because they may spread undetected uterine cancer cells, accelerating the death of a number of women who had morcellator-enabled surgeries.

Unreported Uterine Cancer Wrongful Death

Brigham and Women’s Hospital, where Erica Kaitz had surgery with a power morcellator on June 2012 and died of a leiomyosarcoma that was undetected and likely spread by morcellation.

Rochester General Hospital, where Barb Leary also had surgery with morcellation in 2009 and died of leiomyosarcoma that was undetected and spread by the surgery. Linda Interlichia, who was operated on in 2013 died the following year of the same cause.

University of Rochester Medical Center, where Brenda Leuzzi had surgery in 2012 that led to a similar outcome two years later.

Latest Power Morcellator Lawsuit

Audrey and Darryl Rayford from Louisiana, filed their complaint in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana on December 15, alleging that Audrey Rayford underwent a laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy using power morcellation in December 2014.

According to the Rayfords, the power morcellator device manufactured by Storz Americaa, led to the spread of a potentially deadly uterine cancer in the wife. The Rayfords said the company failed to alert doctors and the general public to the risk that the device could spread undetected cancer cells, making the cancer much more difficult to treat.

Risk of Uterine Cancer Spread With Power Morcellation

Women with undetected uterine cancer that undergo power morcellation procedures may find the cancer spreads during the surgery, making it much more difficult to treat.

According to Rayford, prior to her surgery she had no evidence of metastasized uterine cancer but after her procedure, Rayford was told she had cancer of the uterus. She later discovered that the use of morcellation during her surgery cause the spread or upstaging of her cancer.

Deadly Uterine Sarcoma Spread Linked to Morcellators

Undiagnosed uterine sarcoma is a type of cancer that can be be spread by morcellation procedures. Uterine sarcoma is a rare form of uterine cancer that typically has a good prognosis if the cancer is detected before it spreads to the abdomen and pelvis. Once the uterine cancer has metastasized, cancer treatment becomes less successful and leads to early death usually within 2 years of diagnosis.

FDA 2014 Warning

In April 2014, the FDA issued a warning notifying doctors and patients that power morcellators could spread undetected uterine cancer cells. There is no reliable method to diagnose if cancer cells are present prior to a hysterectomy procedure, and so the FDA recommended at the time that patients be counseled on the risks associated with power morcellators.

The FDA also advised that morcellators should not be used in the majority of hysterectomies and myomectomies, since open or vaginal procedures are associated with better results and fewer complications.

FDA Morcellator Black Box Warning

On July 30, 2014, Johnson & Johnson subsidiary, Ethicon, announced a voluntary power morcellator recall. The Johnson & Johnson company, controlled more than 70% of the market, notified doctors to return all of its power morcellator products, stop using them and said it was withdrawing from the power morcellator market.

The FDA announced November 24, 2014 that it is adding a black box warning to uterine morcellator devices that remain on the market. A BLACK BOX WARNING, is the strongest warning that can be placed on any medical device.

Patients, doctors and hospitals are now on notice of the potential danger of increased uterine cancer spread risk associated with the use of these devices. Furthermore, the FDA announced that power morcellators should not be used with women near menopause or post-menopausal, or in women who could have tissue removed through the vagina or via a small incision.

This contraindication prohibits the use of the devices in the vast majority of women who undergo laparoscopic or vaginal uterine morcellation procedures.

Federal Multidistrict Litigation

In October 2015, all federal lawsuits involving Johnson and Johnson Ethicon only power morcellators were coordinated into multidistrict litigation in Kansas, for pre-trial discovery and consolidation.

According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the popular plastic transvaginal mesh device that has been used to repair pelvic organ prolapse (POP) transvaginally, or through the vagina, will have to undergo rigorous safety studies before being available to be used in patients.

The FDA issued two final orders to vaginal mesh manufacturers and notified the public that the agency is strengthening the medical data requirements for surgical mesh.

Trans Vaginal Mesh AttorneyFDA Classifies Plastic Vaginal Mesh as High Risk

The FDA reclassified these medical devices from class II, or moderate-risk devices, to class III, or high-risk devices.

The FDA also issued a second order that requires the plastic mesh manufacturers to submit a premarket approval (PMA) application to support the safety and effectiveness of surgical mesh for the transvaginal repair of POP.

FDA Will Now Require Rigorous Mesh Medical Studies

The FDA will require mesh manufacturers to address safety concerns, including severe pelvic pain and vaginal and internal organ perforation, through medical studies to demonstrate safety and effectiveness.

The actions apply only to mesh devices marketed for the transvaginal repair of POP and not stress urinary incontinence (SUI) or abdominal repair of POP.

What is Vaginal Surgical Mesh?

Surgical mesh has been used by gynecologists over the past 40 years for the abdominal repair of POP and since the 1990s, for the transvaginal repair of POP. Surgical vaginal mesh is made of biological materials or synthetic materials like polypropylene, polytetrafluoroethylene, polyester fibers or stainless steel. The size, shape, thickness and flexibility vary based on the surgeon’s needs.

In 2002, the first mesh device with this indication was cleared for use as a class II moderate-risk device, and there are five manufacturers who are currently marketing this product.

Severe Pelvic Pain and Perforation Mesh Side Effects

Over the past five years, there has been a significant increase in the number of reported adverse events associated with the use of surgical mesh for transvaginal POP repair.

Manufacturers of surgical mesh to treat POP transvaginally will have 30 months, as required by federal law, to submit a PMA for devices that are already on the market. Manufacturers of new devices must submit a PMA before those devices can be approved for marketing.

What is Pelvic Organ Prolapse?

POP occurs when the muscles and tissue of the pelvic floor become stretched, torn or weakened and can no longer support pelvic organs such as the bladder, bowel or uterus; as a result, the organs drop from their normal position and bulge (prolapse) into the vagina.

Women affected with POP experience low back pain or pelvic pressure, painful intercourse, constipation or urinary problems such as leakage or a chronic urge to urinate.

Thousands of Women with Mesh Related Complications

FDA has received thousands of reports of complications involving the use of mesh for transvaginal POP repair. The most common problems reported include severe pelvic pain, pain during intercourse, infection, bleeding, organ perforation and urinary problems from mesh eroding into surrounding tissues.

Vaginal Mesh Litigation

Most of the vaginal mesh side effect litigation has been filed in the federal court system, where all cases are consolidated for pretrial proceedings as part of a multidistrict litigation (MDL).

U.S. District Judge Joseph Goodwin in the Southern District of West Virginia is overseeing the litigation since February 2012. Judge Goodwin has presided over more than 100,000 transvaginal mesh and bladder sling lawsuits filed against various manufacturers, including C.R. Bard, Boston Scientific, American Medical Systems, Johnson and Johnson’s Ethicon subsidiary, Coloplast, and others.

Several cases have gone to trial with significant jury verdicts. To date the only major mesh manufacturer to settle is American Medical Systems. Bard and Boston Scientific are in settlement discussions but Ethicon is the lone holdout with bellwether trials set for later in 2016.

Timothy Wilkes from Ohio, filed a testosterone drug personal injury and product liability lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. According to Wilkes, the side effects of the popular testosterone replacement medication, AndroGel caused a deep vein thrombosis or a blood clot in his legs that traveled to the lung, causing a pulmonary embolism.

1-Androgel Heart Attack AttorneyAndroGel Used as “Lifestyle” Low T Testosterone Replacement

There are almost 3,500 testosterone lawsuits filed in the federal court system, alleging injuries caused by the side effects of testosterone drugs, including AndroGel, Testim, Axiron, Androderm and other variations of gels, patches, pills and injections.

According to the lawsuits, the drug manufacturers touted the testosterone replacement drugs without providing warnings of an increased risk of heart attacks, strokes, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis or other cardiovascular injury.

Furthermore, the plaintiffs allege that the aggressive advertising on television, magazines and print ads encouraged the men to seek testosterone drugs prescriptions as a lifestyle change to combat the natural effects of aging.

“Low T” A Fake Disease

Testosterone medications were promoted in slick “low T” ads as a universal panacea to treat fatigue, weight gain, low sex drive, loss of muscle mass and low energy which many middle age men complain about. The companies that manufactured the testosterone drugs spent  millions of dollars in promoting the non-existent disease and in creating  blockbuster drug sales for the modern day “magical elixir of life.”

According to medical studies, testosterone is only indicated in men who have been diagnosed with hypogonadism, of which there is less than 1 million affected men in the United States.

Federal Multidistrict (MDL) Litigation

All complaints filed throughout the federal court system have been centralized for pretrial proceedings before U.S. District Judge Matthew Kennelly in the Northern District of Illinois, as part of an MDL.

The MDL process is common in pharmaceutical and product liability cases, where there are a large number of plaintiffs alleging similar claims. The MDL allows for the streamlining of the lawsuits, standardized discovery, early bellwether trials and a push for settlement negotiations.

2016 Androgel Bellwether Trials

As part of the coordinated discovery, a group of Androgel cases are being prepared for early bellwether trial dates in 2016. Trial dates for three Androgel thromboembolism cases have been set for October 31, 2016, December 5, 2016 and January 9, 2017. The three Androgel heart attack cases are set for February 13, 2017, March 20, 2017 and April 24, 2017.

Testosterone Deep Vein Thrombosis, Pulmonary Embolism, Stroke and Heart Attacks

According to a November 2013 Journal of the American Medical Association study, older men who began taking testosterone drugs had an increased risk of cardiovascular events, including heart attacks, strokes and death.

In a 2014 medical study in the journal PLoSOne, found that side effects of testosterone drugs may double the risk of heart attacks for men over the age of 65, and as double the risk for younger men with a prior history of heart disease.

In a 2015 study in the journal Pharmacotherapy found that first time testosterone users may be 40% more likely to have a heart attack when compared to men who did not use the drugs.

FDA 2015 Warning Label Change

The FDA announced a warning label update for testosterone drugs in March 2015, highlighting the link between testosterone drugs and heart disease. According to the FDA, testosterone therapy should be limited to men medically diagnosed with hypogonadism, a rare medical condition characterized by low testosterone levels.

Recently, a Philadelphia jury found for the plaintiff Patricia Hammons, who suffered serious internal injuries from the Ethicon Prolift vaginal mesh. Johnson and Johnson, the manufacturer is exposed to at least fifty thousand similar claims, with hundreds of lawsuits fast tracked for early trial in 2016.

Trans Vaginal Mesh Attorney$12.5M Verdict and Punitive Damages Awarded

Hammons, was awarded $5.5 million in compensatory damages and $7 million in punitive damages against Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon subsidiary. Punitive damages are rarely awarded in product liability and personal injury lawsuits, and are designed to punish the company for gross negligence and reckless disregard for the safety of patients.

Ethicon Prolift Vaginal Mesh Used for Bladder Prolapse

Hammons received the Ethicon Prolift mesh to correct her bladder prolapse. According to Hammons, the vaginal mesh was a defectively designed, causing severe complications, lead to scar tissue and the device mesh medical eroded into her bladder.

Because of the serious side effects Hammons had to undergo several corrective surgeries and now has life long injuries.

Nationwide Ethicon Mesh 50,000 Lawsuits Filed

More than 50,000 Ethicon mesh lawsuits have been filed across the U.S. with similar injury complications.

There are about 800 lawsuits pending in the Pennsylvania state court, but most of the litigation hconsolidated and centralized in the federal court system, as part of a multidistrict litigation (MDL).

The Mesh MDL is centralized before U.S. District Judge Joseph Goodwin in the Southern District of West Virginia since February 2012.

Judge Goodwin is overseeing more than 100,000 transvaginal mesh and bladder sling lawsuits filed against mesh and bladder sling manufacturers, including C.R. Bard, Boston Scientific, American Medical Systems (AMS), Coloplast, Covidien, Cook and Neomedic.

Bellwether Mesh Verdicts

Several bellwether trials have reached verdict over the past few years and injured women have received similar multi-million dollar awards including many significant punitive damage awards against the mesh manufacturers.

Of the major mesh manufacturers only AMS has resolved their lawsuits in a global fashion. Bard and Boston Scientific are in settlement talks to resolve large numbers of cases.

Bard Announces Vaginal Mesh Settlement

C.R. Bard announces settlement of large groups of injury and product liability cases by women who have experienced complications after receiving their bladder sling and pelvic support products.

In a recent filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on July 24, C.R. Bard noted that it reached settlements in about 1,300 vaginal mesh claims in June, and another 1,500 in July.

According to Bloomberg News, the medical device manufacturer will pay more than $200 million to resolve a group of at least 3,000.

Johnson & Johnson is the lone hold out in resolving the Ethicon mesh litigation. Three separate groups of Ethicon mesh cases have been selected, to become trial ready in 2016. Judge Goodwin has scheduled a group of 200 cases, which may be trial ready by October 2016.

What is Transvaginal Mesh and why is it Dangerous?

Transvaginal mesh and bladder sling devices are used for surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse and female stress urinary incontinence. Serious side effects have reported including severe and debilitating problems due to erosion of the mesh through the vagina, infection, urinary incontinence and other significant complications, often leading to multiple painful revision surgeries.

The manufacturers of the Wright Conserve metal on metal hip implant were hammered in a recent personal injury and defective product liability trial. The Georgia federal jury awarded $11 million to Robyn Christiansen, in the first bellwether Wright Conserve hip replacement lawsuit to go to trial.

Wright Conserve  metallosis attorney$10 Million Punitive Damages

The jury awarded $1 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in punitive damages, which is designed to punish the Wright Conserve hip replacement manufacturer for gross negligence for recklessly disregarding the safety of hip patients.

Over 500 Wright Conserve Hip Implant Lawsuits

Wright Conserve hip replacement manufacture is exposed to more than 530 personal injury and product liability lawsuits. Plaintiffs claim that patients suffered serious and catastrophic hip failures from the metal-on-metal design was unreasonably dangerous and defective.

Wright Conserve Hip Lawsuit Allegations

According to the lawsuits, the metal-on-metal hip leads to metallic debris to be released during the grinding action between the metal cup and metal ball, which causes early implant failure. Some complications include premature device failure, loosening, metal poisoning and metallosis and severe pain.

Artificial hip replacements are expected to last at least 15 to 20 years, but Christiansen’s Wright Conserve hip implant failed after only six years, resulting in the need for major revision surgery.

Continue reading

Continue reading

In the United States, Hysterectomy is the second most frequently performed surgical procedure (after cesarean section). The majority of these hysterectomies are performed laparoscopically.

Uterine_Cancer_Hysterectomy_Attorney

What is Laparoscopic Hysterectomy?

Minimally invasive or laparoscopic removal of the uterus, is know as hysterectomy and typically performed for the treatment of fibroids or benign tumors of the uterus. During the surgery, many doctors remove the uterus in pieces using a mechanical grinding or chopping device known as a power morcellator.

Recently, many personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits being filed against the manufacturers of power morcellators. The injured women claim that patients and doctors should have been warned about the risks associated with use of the medical devices during minimally invasive, laparoscopic hysterectomies.

What Are Power Morcellators?

Power morcellators are medical devices that are used during laparoscopic hysterectomy and myomectomy (fibroid removal) procedures. The device allows the surgeon to grind up the uterus or uterine fibroids and remove the tissue through a small incision in the abdomen. The medical device is used during minimally invasive surgery, and reduces recovery time, scarring and speeds up recovery time.

How Morcellator Increases the Risk of Uterine Cancer Spread

According to medical experts and the FDA, about one out of every 350 women undergoing a laparoscopic hysterectomy with morcellation may have undiagnosed sarcoma, which doctors are unable to detect before the surgery. Undiagnosed uterine sarcoma is highly malignant and is a lethal form of cancer, with poor life expectancy and treatment options. Most women die shortly after diagnosis and there are no curative treatments.

There is no bullet proof way for doctors to diagnose the uterine cancer before using the morcellator devices. Because of this, the FDA strongly urged doctors to avoid using the devices for laparoscopic hysterectomy or myomectomy procedures in April 2014. The FDA issued a BLACK BOX WARNING against the use of these devices in November 2014.

Power morcellators spread this undiagnosed leiomyosarcoma, endometrial stromal sarcoma or other cancer throughout the pelvis and abdomen during the grinding process, leading to rapid upstaging of the cancer and reducing the risk of long-term survival. As this risk becomes known, many doctors and hospitals have stopped the use of power morcellators over the past year.

Morcellators Approved Under the 510(k) Program

The controversial 510(k) program allows medical devices to be approved without pre-market testing requirements. Under the program, the manufacturer just needs to show that the devices are “substantially equivalent” to devices already on the market. Power morcellators were approved under the 510(k) process without any safety testing.

J&J Ethicon Morcellator Recall

All Ethicon power morcellators were recalled by the manufacturer, in 2014. J&J, acknowledged that the devices pose an unreasonable risk of spreading uterine cancer. Ethicon, a J&J subsidiary requested that hospitals voluntarily return all laparoscopic surgery morcellators. The company, noted that it will no longer sell the devices since there is no way to make them safe.

FDA Morcellator Black Box Warning

The FDA announced November 24, 2014 that it is adding a black box warning to uterine morcellator devices that remain on the market. A BLACK BOX WARNING, is the strongest warning that can be placed on any medical device.

Patients, doctors and hospitals are now on notice of the potential danger of increased uterine cancer spread risk associated with the use of these devices. Furthermore, the FDA announced that power morcellators should not be used with women near menopause or post-menopausal, or in women who could have tissue removed through the vagina or via a small incision.

This contraindication prohibits the use of the devices in the vast majority of women who undergo laparoscopic or vaginal uterine morcellation procedures.

Power Morcellator Litigation Centralized

Many complaints have been filed in the federal court system nationwide. These women were diagnosed with the spread of leiomyosarcoma, endometrial stromal sarcoma or other cancers following uterine fibroid surgery.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas was recently approved for the centralization and consolidation in a multidistrict litigation (MDL) court. This is centralized only against Johnson and Johnson’s subsidiary, Ethicon morcellator manufacturer.

This means that all federal morcellator lawsuits will be consolidated for pre-trial discovery and early bellwether trials in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas. Federal courts consolidate lawsuits to MDLs when a large number of plaintiffs claim the same facts against the same defendant. The process allows the courts to operate more efficiently and decreases the costs for all parties involved.

All of the lawsuits filed against manufacturers of these devices claim that hysterectomy morcellators are unreasonably dangerous and that information about the risk of uterine cancer being spread was withheld from the patients and doctors.

Continue reading

Ashlie Fluitt from Louisiana,  filed a wrongful death claim on behalf of her grandmother who died as a result of catastrophic side effects from using Xarelto. Fluitt alleges that Xarelto anticoagulation medication caused severe brain bleeding which caused her grandmother to die.

Xarelto Injury LawsuitsFluitt filed her lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana claiming that Hattie Deville-Goodwin’s death was caused by the drug manufacturers’ failure to warn about the uncontrollable bleeding side effects associated with the new-generation anticoagulant or blood thinner Xarelto.

Deville-Goodwin took Xarelto for treatment of deep vein thrombosis or blood clot in her leg. Two months later, Deville-Goodwin developed severe bleeding in the brain, and died shortly afterwards from the deadly intracranial hemorrhage.

Many lawsuits have been filed against Xarelto’s manufacturers,  Bayer and Johnson & Johnson and the plaintiffs claim that the companies failed to warn patients and doctors about the risks associated with Xarelto and the lack of an antidote to help stop the bleeding.

Since December 2014, all federal product liability lawsuits filed against Bayer and Johnson & Johnson over the bleeding side effects of Xarelto have been centralized and consolidated before U.S. District Judge Eldon Fallon in the Eastern District of Louisiana as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation.

Lawsuits against Bayer and Johnson & Johnson are consolidated in two courts, a multidistrict litigation court in the Eastern District of Louisiana and a mass tort litigation court in Philadelphia.

The MDL in Louisiana contains over 2,400 federal lawsuits, and the mass tort in Philadelphia contains more than 500 state lawsuits.

Continue reading

Contact Information