Class Action Article

  • File A Talcum Powder Lawsuit: Talcum Powder Ovarian Cancer Lawsuits Talcum Powder Fallopian Tube Cancer Lawsuits Baby  Powder Ovarian Cancer Lawsuits Filed If you or a loved one used talcum powder products and were diagnosed with ovarian cancer, or fallopian tube can...

Class Action News

Drug Class Actions

  • Taxotere Lawyers for Permanent Hair Loss: Taxotere Baldness Lawyers For  Permanent Hair Loss Lawsuits Have you received Taxotere for breast cancer? Taxotere can result in hair loss or baldness  that is permanent. Taxotere  is a chemotherapy drug used for the treatment of breas...

Medical Device Lawsuits

  • Zimmer Hip Replacement Lawyers: Network Zimmer Hip Replacement  Lawyer Win $2 Million Against Zimmer Hip Replacement Do You Have A Faulty Zimmer M/L Taper Hip Prothesis With Connective Technology and Cobalt Chromium Head? Do You Have Have Metallosis or Chromium Cobalt T...

Posts Tagged ‘Stryker hip replacement lawyer’

Stryker Femoral Heads Hip Replacement Lawyers

Written by lisaspitzer on . Posted in Class MDL Class Action News, Stryker femoral head hip Implant lawyer

Stryker V40 Taper Hip Replacement Lawyers Stryker Hip Replacement Lawyers

Hip Implant lawyers are filing hip replacement lawsuits for V40 Femoral head failure in the Stryker Hip Implant. In August 2016, Stryker contacted implanting physicians about metal wear associated with its V40 Taper when used with some cobalt chromium heads.Stryker Orthopaedics sent an Urgent Medical Device Recall Notification to orthopedic surgeons. The recall involves certain sizes of LIFT™ Anatomic CoCr V40™ Femoral Heads manufactured prior to 2011. If you had a LIFT- V40 Femoral Head implanted during total hip replacement, you should be watching for a letter from your surgeon in the next few weeks. You may also be getting a letter from Stryker or a company hired by Stryker to handle claims.

 Stryker Recall Metal V 40 Femoral Heads Lawsuits

Stryker has voluntarily recalled some of their metal V40 femoral heads used with hip implants. Stryker hip replacement lawyers are interested in speaking to anyone with a failed: Exeter, Citation, Meridian, Reliance, Definition, Restoration, Accolade Rejuvenate ABG 2 stems.

This failure may be due to the problems with the V40 femoral head.

The failure of these heads is caused by corrosion and metal debris at the junction between the metal head and neck. The clinical results for patients include pain, loss of mobility, ambulation problems and an inability to work. Poisoning of the soft tissue, muscle and bone are the cause. Revision surgeries may be needed due to premature failures. Stryker lawyers  are seeking patients with  LFit V40 femoral heads made before 2011.

What Is The Femoral Head  Problem?

This is a ball for total hip replacements that can be attached to hip stems, including the Accolade TMZF, Accolade 2, Meridian, and Citation. There have been numerous incidents  of taper lock failures on LFit V40 femoral heads made before 2011,  This taper lock connects the “ball” part of the hip joint to the  hip stem that is inserted in the femur. When it breaks the femoral head will detach from the femoral neck.

Get A Stryker Hip Implant Lawyer

Our Stryker Hip Replacement lawyers are currently accepting Stryker LFit V40 failure cases.

Hip Replacement Helpline Launched

Written by lisaspitzer on . Posted in Biomet Hip Replacement lawyers, DePuyPinnacle- ASR Hip Replacement lawyers, encore hip replacement lawyers, Medical Device Lawsuits, Omnilife Hip Replacement lawyers, Smith amd Nephew Hip Replacement Lawyers, Wright hip Replacement lawyers

Hip Replacement Lawsuits

Many of the Hip replacement  manufacturers of the metal-on-metal hip implants have recalled their implants for functional defects.  There have been settlement offers on hip replacements for victims of a faulty hip implant or cobalt and chromium poisoning to the blood stream.

Hip Replacement Revision Surgery Lawsuits

Hip replacement or revision surgery is one of the most common orthopedic  procedures performed in the United States.  There have been numerous defective implants placed on the market resulting in needles pain, suffering and revision surgeries

Get A Hip Replacement Lawyer

Below is a  list of cases our hip replacement lawyers   will take a look at.

  1. Stryker Rejuvenate Modular Neck Cases – All
  2. Stryker ABG II Modular neck Cases – All
  3. Stryker Accolade (TMZF) Stem cases with Cobalt Chromium modular heads. These stems have the potential for significant head neck corrosion – All cases with Metallosis.
  4. Wright Medical Conserve Cup (MOM) cases – ALL
  5. Wright Medical Profemur Stem Cases (this is their modular neck design)- These cases are prone to Fracture (either the titanium or CoCr necks) and Metallosis. ALL.
  6. Depuy ASR – ALL
  7. Depuy Pinnacle Metal on Metal (MOM) with modular heads greater than 36 mm.
  8. Zimmer Durom Cup cases with modular heads greater than 36 mm.
  9.  Zimmer M/L Taper Kinectiv Stem cases (this is their Modular neck design)- All cases with Metallosis.
  10.  Biomet M2A 38mm / Magnum MOM cases. ALL cases with Metallosis.
  11.  DJO / Encore MOM hip cases. All cases revised due to Metallosis.
  12.  Omnilife Apex Arc – This is a smaller manufacturer but this device is a mixed metal modular neck device. ALL
  13.  Smith & Nephew R3 (MOM) cup cases. Only cases that have metallosis and were revised or need a revision.
  14. Smith & Nephew SMF stem (this is their mixed metal modular neck product). We have not seen many of these yet but, our hip replacement lawyers are interested in them.

Female Class Action Lawsuit Lawyers For Women

Written by lisaspitzer on . Posted in Actos Lawsuit Lawyers, Alabama Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Alaska Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Arizona Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Arkansas Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, California Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Class Action Articles, Colorado Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Connecticut Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Delaware Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Florida Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Georgia Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, GranuFlo Dialysis Medication Lawyers, Hawaii Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Idaho Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Illinois Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Indiana Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Iowa Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Kansas Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Kentucky Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Louisiana Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Maine Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Maryland Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Massachusetts Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Michigan Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Minnesota Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Mirena IUD Lawyers, Mississippi Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Missouri Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Montana Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Nebraska Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Nevada Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, New Hampshire Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, New Jersey Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, New Mexico Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, New York Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, North Carolina Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, North Dakota Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Ohio Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Oklahoma Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Oregon Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Pennsylvania Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Rhode Island Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, South Carolina Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, South Dakota Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Stryker Hip replacement recall lawyer, Stryker Rejuvinate, Stryker Rejuvinate Hip replacement recall lawyers, Tennessee Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Texas Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Toxic Substances, Tylenol Liver Damage Lawsuits, Utah Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Vermont Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Virginia Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Washington DC Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Washington Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, West Virginia Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Wisconsin Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Wyoming Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers

It has become apparent that there is a large number of drugs and devices class actions that have been filed against manyfacturers that have targeted women.

We can start with the Dow Corning  siicone  breast implant class action of years ago.  Women are still suffering today. The Dow Corning Trust just recently launched a silicone breast implant explant program.  The leaking silicone and bursting implants  lead to toxicity related immune system diseases like lupus and fibromylagia and other immune deficiency diseases. Women to this date are still suffering from their Dow silicone Breast Implants and the Dow Corning settlement trust is stll living out payments like the new breast explant program.

          Fosamax was supposed to cure osteoporosis but ended up  causing femur fractures.Then we have Yaz and Yasmine birth control pills. Young women were having their lives  altered by pre-mature strokes, pulmonary embolisms, deep vein thrombosis, blood clots  and heart attacks.  Many girls harmed were  barely starting a college life.

       History moves along to the metal on metal and metal componednt hip replacements like the  DePuy Pinnacle and ASR Hip Replacement and the Stryker Rejuvinate and ABG II Modular Stems. These are  a metal on metal hip replacement recalled for their  need for revision surgery. These hip replacements failed  in women more then men. The  smaller frame of a women makes the device more prone to problems in the female structure.

NuvaRing Lawsuits

NuvRing has been another disaster for women causing:

    blood clots in women
    cerebral thrombosis in women
    deep vein thrombosis
    heart attack in women
    pulmonary embolism
    retinal thrombosis in women
    stroke or cerebral hemorrhage
    thrombophlebitis and venous thrombosis with or without embolism
    toxic shock syndrome

Fosamax Lawsuits

Fosamax for osteoporosis actually causes what it is prescribed to fix , femur fractures.

Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits

   The biggest and most horrific is the  the various vaginal mesh devices for urinary incontinence and uterine, bladder and bowel prolapse. This mesh device is made of a Prolene plastic synthetic fiber that has been falling aprt in women. Thousands of  women across the country are screaming the horrors of the vaginal mesh and lawsuits are being filed in droves. Women are in severe pain described  as razor blades. The mesh  has been reported by female victims to be  eroding thru the vaginal wall and at times into the bladder and bowel.  Women can no longer have sexual intercourse and marriages are falling apart. Women are losing their jobs and cannot work.  And then we have  the Mirena IUD which has been gravitating our of postion and ending up embedded in the uterus or a nearby organ.

Lives are being ruined and justice must be sought. Lawsuits are the only thing these manufacturers understand.

 

Stryker Hip Replacement Lawsuits, Patients Are Being Contacted To Accept A Revision Surgery Payoff.

Written by lisaspitzer on . Posted in ABG II Lawyers, ABG Modular Stem lawyers, APG II, APG II Lawyers, APG II Recall Lawyers, Class Action Articles, Stryker Homedicam Rejuvinate, Stryker Rejuvinate, Stryker Rejuvinate Hip replacement recall lawyers

Have You Been Contacted By A Representative  Company Offering To Pay For Your Hip Implant Revision Surgery?

Speak to a Stryker lawyer first. The offer is very specific and uses two very important words. They are "if necessary". We do not know what the definition and criteria of "if necessary" is.

Stryker Hip Implant Lawsuits Have Been Consolidated In A Massive Litigation

Lawsuits filed in U.S. District Courts against hip implant maker Stryker Corporation over the recalled Rejuvenate and ABG II hip components have been consolidated in Minnesota in a  multidistrict litigation, or MDL.  This order took effect  June 12, 2013 when the federal Judicial Panel on Multidistrct Litigation ordered 41 Stryker hip lawsuits from 16 different federal districts to be consolidated under the the Honorable Judge Donovan W. Frank.(In Re: Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II Hip Implant Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2441) for
Stryker hip implants.

Many More Lawsuits Are Anticipated

This  consolidation may also encourage Stryker lawsuit settlements. All recipients of a Stryker ABG II Modular Stems or Rejuvinate hip implant needing revision surgery are advised to file their Stryker Hip Replacement Lawsuit.

Have you received a recall letter from Stryker?

Have you been told you need revision surgery?

Have you already gotten revision surgery?

Speak to one of our Stryker Hip Replacement lawyers today before accepting any offers or signing anuy paperwork.

DePuy Pinnacle And ASR Metal On Metal Hip Replacement Lawyers

Written by lisaspitzer on . Posted in Class MDL Class Action News, DePuy Pinnacle Hip Replacement Updates

Class Action Lawyer Network Depuy Pinnacle and ASR  Hip Replacement lawyers are filing lawsuits for victims of the DePuy ASR and DePuy Pinnacle hip replacements.

About the DePuy Pinnacle

Like the ASR XL, the Depuy Pinnacle is a metal on metal system that was designed to last at least 10-15 years, but now, orthopedic surgeons are reporting that these devices have been failing within one to two years of being implanted into their patients. Doctors in England are now reporting that 49 percent of DePuy ASR XL hip implants have failed after six years.
DePuy Hip Replacement lawyers are filing lawsuits for victims of the failed Depuy Pinnacle and DePuy ASR Hip Replacements.

Although the ASR and Pinnacle are both metal on metal systems, there are significant differences between the two :

 The ASR is a monoblock design whereas the Pinnacle uses a modular system.

The ASR cup is made of one solid piece of metal, whereas the Pinnacle has an outer shell.

The Pinnacle is designed in such a way that the surgeon has the option to place a metal, ceramic or polyethylene liner inside the metal outer cup.

Both of these have had problems and lawsuits have been filed.

DePuy Hip Replacement Lawsuit News, Hip Replacement Lawyers Filing Lawsuits

Written by lisaspitzer on . Posted in Class MDL Class Action News

DePuy Hip Replacement Lawsuit Update

DePuy ASR lawsuit claims stemming from the 2010 DePuy hip recall continue to move forward in courts throughout the country . According to documents filed in California’s San Francisco Superior Court on April 25th, a Plaintiff who had been seeking an expedited trial of her DePuy hip lawsuit is voluntarily seeking dismissal of the case. (Tilman v. DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc., et al., No. CGC11508806; Calif. Super. Ct., San Francisco).

This news is particularly interesting as when a case is voluntarily dismissed it is often an indication that the parties have come to an agreement. 

DePuy ASR Hip Lawsuits Lawyers Filing DePuy Lawsuits

Court records indicate that there are more than 10,000 DePuy ASR hip lawsuits currently pending in courts throughout the U.S. The DePuy hip recall was announced after the metal-on-metal hip implants were found to be failing in an unacceptably high number of patients. The U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) is now reviewing the safety of all metal hip implants, over fears that the devices can shed dangerous amounts of metal debris into patient’s bodies, leading to premature failure of the hips and other serious complications. In January, the agency proposed a new regulation that would make such devices ineligible for the agency’s 510(k) clearance process, which allowed all-metal hips like the ASR hip to gain FDA approval without first undergoing human clinical trials. The FDA also advised doctors to test metal hip implant patients for elevated metal ion levels if they present with symptoms of a failing hip implant.*

The majority of DePuy hip lawsuits have been filed in a multidistrict litigation now underway in U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio. Court records indicate that the first trials in that litigation will begin this September. (In re: DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. ASR Hip Implant Products Liability Litigation – MDL 2197) Two lawsuits have already gone to trial at the state level, one of which ended with a California Superior Court jury awarding the Plaintiff more than $8 million in damages. (Kransky v. DePuy, BC456086, California Superior Court, Los Angeles County) However, the jury hearing a second trial in Illinois state court found for DePuy. (Strum v. DePuy, 2011-L-9352, Circuit Court of Cook County) According to an April 16th report from The New York Times, documents submitted as evidence in both of those trials indicated that Johnson & Johnson and its DePuy Orthopaedics unit knew that the ASR was flawed years before the recall was announced, but did not disclose this information to the public or the medical community.**

Earlier this month, DePuy Orthopaedics announced it would end sales of metal-on-metal hip implants, citing recent FDA actions and decreased demand for the products, according to the New York Times. The sales suspension includes a metal-on-metal version of the company’s DePuy Pinnacle hip replacement system, which is also the subject of lawsuits.

If you have a faulty DePuy and have had revision surgery or have been told you need revision surgery call and speak to a hip replacement lawyer today.

FDA Quick Review Process, Dangerous Drugs And Devices Pushed Thru On The Fast Track

Written by lisaspitzer on . Posted in Class MDL Class Action News

Class Action lawyers Filing lawsuits for vaginal mesh, Bladder sling, Stryker Hip replacements and other Hip replacements, GranuFlo, Actos, Pradaxa, Mirena IUD, and many others. Many devices harming victims were pushed thru on the FDA fast track process.

Medical Devices and the Public’s Health: The FDA 510(k) Clearance Process at 35 Years

Released:
    July 29, 2011
Type:
    Consensus Report
Topics:
    Public Health, Quality and Patient Safety
Activity:
    Public Health Effectiveness of the FDA 510(k) Clearance Process
Board:
    Board on Population Health and Public Health Practice

Medical devices play a critical role in the health care of Americans. They can range from simple tools, such as tongue depressors and bandages, to complex or life-saving equipment, such as pacemakers, magnetic resonance imaging machines, and heart–lung machines. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) requires a "reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness" before a device can be marketed, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for enforcing this requirement. Devices that are deemed to have a moderate risk to patients generally cannot go on the market until they are cleared through the 510(k) process, named for Section 510(k) of the FFDCA.  Some policymakers and patients have expressed concern about the ability of the 510(k) process to ensure that medical devices on the market are safe and effective. Other policymakers and patients, as well as the medical-device industry, have asserted that the process has become too burdensome and time-consuming and that it is delaying important new medical devices from entering the market.

The FDA turned to the IOM to review the 510(k) process and answer two questions:

    Does the current 510(k) process protect patients optimally and promote innovation in support of public health?
    If not, what legislative, regulatory, or administrative changes are recommended to achieve the goals of the 510(k) process optimally

The IOM finds that the current 510(k) process is flawed based on its legislative foundation. Rather than continuing to modify the 35-year-old 510(k) process, the IOM concludes that the FDA’s finite resources would be better invested in developing an integrated premarket and postmarket regulatory framework that provides a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness throughout the device life cycle. The IOM outlines its criteria for this framework in the report.

Drug and Devices Regulatory Boards, Class Action Lawyer Network Resources

Written by lisaspitzer on . Posted in Resources abd Regulatory agencies

The lawyers of Class Action Lawyer Network are filing dangerous drugs and devices lawsuits for: GranuFlo, Dialysis medications, Actos, Vaginal Mesh, Stryker Hip Replacement and others. Below is a handy resource of regulatory agencies:

Environmental Protection Agency

    pesticides (sets tolerance levels for residues on feed crops and raw and processed foods)
    municipal water supplies

FAX (703) 308-4776

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms

    alcoholic beverages and tobacco

FAX (202) 927-7862

Drug Enforcement Administration

    drugs of abuse

FAX (202) 307-9765

U.S. Department of Commerce

    exports

FAX (202) 482-5270

Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA)

    health care subsidies

FAX (410) 786-4633

Federal Trade Commission

    nonprescription drug and
    cosmetic advertising

FAX (202) 326-2050

National Marine Fisheries Services

    voluntary seafood inspection program

FAX (301) 713-2258

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

    workplace safety standards

FAX (202) 219-4761

U.S. Customs Service

    imports

FAX (410) 962-7470

Federal Bureau of Investigation

    Federal Anti-Tampering Act

FAX (202) 324-4705

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

    Epidemiology of diseases and other health problems

FAX (404) 488-5973

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

    Licensing and regulation of the nuclear industry

FAX (301) 415-7020

 FDA Office of Surveillance and Epidemiology and the Division of Cardiovascular and Renal Products,

Telephone Numbers Frequently Asked of FDA
FDA General Inquiries

888-INFO-FDA

888-463-6332
  
FDA Centers & Offices 


Office of the Commissioner 888-INFO-FDA
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) 301-827-0372
Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) 301-796-7100
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) 301-796-5400
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) 240-402-1600
Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM)

888-FDA-VETS

888-332-8387

240- 276-9000
National Center for Toxicological Research (NCTR) 870-543-7130
Office of Regulatory Affairs (ORA) 301-827-3101
  
Safety 
FDA's emergency number 301-796-8240
866-300-4374
Food Safety Hotline 888-723-3366
FOIA requests 301-796-3900
MedWatch 800-332-1088
Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System 800-822-7967
Registration of Food Facilities 800-216-7331
  
Ombudsman 
Office of the Chief Mediator and Ombudsman 301-827-3390
CDER Ombudsman 301-594-5443
CBER Ombudsman 301-827-0379
Animal and Veterinary Ombudsman 240-276-9015
CDRH Ombudsman 301-796-5699
  
Related Contacts 
Consumer Product Safety Commission 800-638-2772
Federal Trade Commission 877-382-4357
Treasury Department’s Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 877-382-4357
Dept. of Agriculture – Food Safety and Inspection Service 800-535-4555
EPA – Office of Pesticide Programs 202-260-2090

Regulatory Boards To Contact For Complaints

    Accountancy
    Alarm Systems Contractors Board
    Architectural & Engineering Examiners
    Auctioneer Commission
    Barber Examiners
    Collection Service
    Contractors/Home Improvement
    Cosmetology
    Employee Leasing (*now part of the Insurance Division)
    Funeral Directors, Embalmers and Burial Services
    Geology
    Home Inspector Licensing Advisory
    Land Surveyors
    Limited Licensed Electricians
    Limited Licensed Plumbers
    Locksmith Licensing Program Advisory
    Motor Vehicle Commission
    Private Investigation & Polygraph Commission
    Private Probation Service Council
    Private Protective Services
    Race Track Licensing Program
    Real Estate Appraisers
    Real Estate Commission
    Scrap Metals Registration Program
    Soil Scientist Licensing Program

Bellwether Trials Ready For 2013, Lawyers Filing Vaginal Mesh and DePuy Lawsuits

Written by lisaspitzer on . Posted in Alabama Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Arizona Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, California Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Class MDL Class Action News, Colorado Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Connecticut Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Florida Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Georgia Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Illinois Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Iowa Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Maryland Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Massachusetts Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Michigan Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Minnesota Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Missouri Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Montana Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, New Jersey Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, New York Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, North Carolina Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, NYC Class Action Lawyers, Ohio Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Pennsylvania Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, South Carolina Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Utah Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers

What is a Bellwether case?

It meets the needs of thousands of plaintiffs all injured by a particular product or group of products. The courts cannot handle thousands of trials. There is no other feasible way for the courts to handle this enormous caseload. The 2013 big bellwether cases going to trial are the  vaginal mesh and DePuy hip replacement. This approach has been used in many cases including asbestos, mesothelioma cases.. A group of plaintiffs are chosen to represent all the plaintiffs.  The verdicts from this group is  used for   the remaining plaintiffs’ cases. The actual results may be utilized for setting a value for  groups of claims in settlements. The plaintiffs can also choose to continue with their own individual trials with their own attorney.

Important Bellwether Trials for 2013

Vaginal Mesh

The first bellwether trials in the Transvaginal Mesh MDL (Multidistrict Litigations) are scheduled to start at the end of 2013.

A status conference for  five vaginal mesh implant lawsuit MDLs was called on December 6, 2012 to announce the first three bellwether trials that will begin in December of 2013. The U.S. District Judge that is overseeing the trials in the Southern District of West Virginia, Judge Joseph R. Goodwin, has scheduled the three bellwether trials which will involve three different vaginal mesh implant manufacturers as defendants.

  • American Medical Systems
  • Ethicon 
  • Boston Scientific.

These "bellwether" trials should give women, and attorneys, a better idea of the viability of their lawsuits and the basis for compensation. Four of the multi-district litigations (MDL) around the country will begin this year, with the earliest starting this month in New Jersey. Another MDL in West Virginia is set to begin in February.

With thousands of women injured by these malfunctioning mesh implants a group of plaintiffs are chosen to represent all the plaintiffs

DePuy Hip Replacement

The first DePuy Hip Replacement  trial  is scheduled to begin on Monday, January 7, 2013, in Prince George's Maryland Circuit Court. The trial is expected to last three weeks, according to court documents. (Jackson, et al. v. Chesapeake Surgical Ltd., et al., CAL 10-32147)

Judge David Katz of the U.S. District Court, District of Northern Ohio has scheduled the first bellwether trials in the DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. ASR Hip Implant Products Liability Litigation(MDL No. 2197) for May 6, 2013 and July 8, 2013.

DePuyHip Replacement Lawsuits Progress, Hip Replacement Lawyers

Written by lisaspitzer on . Posted in Alabama Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Alaska Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Arizona Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Arkansas Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, California Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Class MDL Class Action News, Colorado Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Connecticut Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Delaware Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Florida Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Georgia Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Hawaii Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Idaho Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Illinois Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Indiana Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Iowa Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Kansas Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Kentucky Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Louisiana Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Maine Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Maryland Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Massachusetts Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Michigan Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Minnesota Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Mississippi Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Missouri Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Montana Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Nebraska Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Nevada Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, New Hampshire Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, New Jersey Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, New Mexico Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, New York Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, North Carolina Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, North Dakota Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Ohio Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Oklahoma Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Oregon Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Pennsylvania Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Rhode Island Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, South Carolina Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, South Dakota Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Tennessee Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Texas Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Vermont Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Virginia Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Washington DC Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Washington Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, West Virginia Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Wisconsin Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers, Wyoming Multidistrict Litigation Lawyers

The DePuy metal on metal hip replacement is currently in the ligation process. The DePuy is a part of a long line of metal on metal hip recalls, the most recent being the Stryker metal component hip replacements. As the trials progress executives will be questioned as to knowledge of the potential failure of these devices.

Executives that will be questioned  include David Floyd, former president of DePuy at the time of the 2010 recall; Tom Camino, worldwide hip development director; and Rodrigo Diaz, manager of clinical research. Additional executives include the director of marketing, manager of development, director of biostatistics and data management, and member of the research and development team.

The DePuy is a part of a massive multi distrct litigation effecting 1000's of people with a hip implant that failed. Most of them will require additional surgeries with rehabilitation. The problem appears to be that these revision surgeries are not always working. Many people, mostly seniors, have been severely debilitated by these failed hips and their quality of life will never be the same again. Additional problems include metal on metal chromium and cobalt toxicity.

The most recent updates report that  Judge Brian R. Martinotti of Bergen County Superior Court in New Jersey issued an order setting September 9, 2013 and October 21, 2013 as the dates for the first two ASR bellwether trials to be held in the state’s multicounty litigation against DePuy Orthopaedics. Attorneys for both sides must select three cases as bellwether trial candidates by October 15, 2012.

The latest news on the Stryker Rejuvinate recall reports that Stryker has warned in its recall notice that patients with the Rejuvenate or AGB II hip implant components may develop adverse  reactions that could manifest with symptoms of pain and/or swelling.* According to a  recent report  it appears eight  people  have filed lawsuits in New Jersey Superior Court, Bergen County claiming Stryker  sold their  Rejuvenate hip stem while knowing it had problems. The Stryker also appears to be having the same metal on metal toxicity problems as the DePuy even thou it is a metal component and not metal on metal product.

If you have a faulty DePuy or Stryker product you are encouraged to call our Metal on metal hip replacement helpline today to speak to a hip replacement lawyer.