Our Hernia Mesh Lawsuit Attorneys Can Help.
Hernia Mesh Lawsuit Updates
Now accepting cases involving STRATTICE™ mesh products.
Hernia Mesh Lawsuit - How You Qualify:
Hernia Mesh Lawsuit - You Don't Qualify if:
Hernia Mesh Lawsuit
Pain and Discomfort after Hernia Mesh Revision Surgery?
Many manufacturers of mesh devices are involved in multi-district products liability litigation. If you've seen a doctor about health concerns after hernia mesh implant surgery, you can call to speak with one of our defective medical device lawyers at no cost.
Call TheLawFirm.com 1-844-275-6900 for a Free Consultation.
Allow us the opportunity to asses your unique situation and offer you the best possible legal advice based on years of successfully fighting for our clients.
Hernia Mesh Lawyer - Free consultation
The following hernia mesh devices are involved in multidistrict products liability litigation:
Ethicon PHYSIOMESH Flexible Composite Hernia Mesh MDL
Federal products liability cases involving Ethicon, Inc.’s Physiomesh Flexible Composite Mesh have been consolidated as multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the Northern District of Georgia. According to the courts case summary, “This litigation involves claims that a particular hernia mesh product was allegedly defectively designed, manufactured, and labeled by Ethicon, Inc. and/or Johnson & Johnson and caused personal injuries to the plaintiffs.”
As of September 17, 2018, the Ethicon PHYSIOMESH Flexible Composite MDL included 1,430 pending cases. The MDL explicitly does not include claims relating to PHYSIOMESH Open Flexible Composite Mesh.
Atrium C-Qur Mesh MDL
Since December 2016, federal products liability cases over Atrium Medical Corp.'s C-Qur Mesh have been centralized in the District of New Hampshire under the oversight of District Court Judge Landya McCafferty. As of September 13, 2018, the MDL contained over 750 active cases, with the vast majority already having had the District of New Hampshire as their venue.
CR Bard Pelvic Repair System MDL
In October 2010, by order of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML), federal products liability cases involving CR Bard. Inc.'s Pelvic Repair System were consolidated as multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the Southern District of West Virginia. As of September 2018, the MDL contained 15,604 total cases, of which 12,029 have been closed.
Davol / CR Bard Polypropylene Hernia Mesh
On August 2, 2018, the US Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) filed a transfer order establishing multidistrict litigation (MDL) consolidating products liability claims involving polypropylene hernia repair products manufactured by Davol, Inc. and CR Bard, Inc. The order transferred the cases to the Southern District of Ohio to be overseen by Judge Edmund A. Sargus.
The JPML’s transfer order included over 50 separate cases from over 20 different United States District Courts.
Ethicon Pelvic Repair System MDL
Since 2012, the US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia has been overseeing multidistrict litigation (MDL) relating to Ethicon Inc.’s Pelvic Repair System. On September 13, 2018, the court entered an order establishing a qualified settlement and appointing an administrator to oversee it.
While the terms of the settlement agreement remained confidential, the court named Archer Systems, LLC as administrator of the qualified settlement fund with the money itself to be held in an account at JP Morgan Chase, which will also serve as escrow agent to the fund.
As of September 2018, the Ethicon Pelvic Repair System MDL contained a staggering 40,290 total cases, with 13,056 cases having been closed.
May 9, 2021
Author: Daniel Gala
Atrium C-QUR Mesh Litigation Moves Toward First Bellwether Trials, Passes 3300 Cases
As the parties in multidistrict litigation (MDL) over Atrium C-QUR surgical mesh proceed through pretrial discovery on their way to the first bellwether trials, the four-year-old MDL has grown to include more than 3,300 cases as of May 7, 2021, according to court documents .
These thousands of plaintiffs allege that Atrium C-QUR mesh products were defectively designed and manufactured such that they can cause serious allergic or inflammatory responses when surgically implanted into patients' bodies, potentially leading to severe complications. Plaintiffs further contend that the defendant Atrium either knew or should have known of this risk and that Atrium failed to provide adequate warnings and instructions, which plaintiffs argue would have alerted patients and their doctors to the potential for an allergic or inflammatory response and helped to mitigate potential harms.
Though cases have been selected for the first two bellwether trials in the C-QUR mesh MDL, the parties continue to slog through the pretrial discovery process, during which time documents and other potential evidence are exchanged and the parties battle it out over which evidence will be admissible at trial. For litigation involving medical devices or pharmaceuticals, in which the evidence often is highly technical and beyond the ability of a layperson to interpret on his or her own, the fight over which expert witnesses are able to testify at trial is of particular significance. Sometimes, not just an entire case but an entire MDL can hinge on which experts a jury is allowed—or not allowed—to hear from.
This is the stage at which the Atrium C-QUR mesh MDL stands right now, with the parties submitting various court filings—often referred to as Daubert motions for the name of the case that established the modern rules for the admissibility of expert testimony—urging the court to either allow or deny the opportunity for certain experts to testify at the first two bellwether trials. With so much on the line, this process can, and does, often become quite contentious, and it can take months to complete.
However, progress continues to be made. In early March, the court issued an order simultaneously resolving a number of outstanding expert-witness-related issues pertaining to both the first and second bellwether trials. While the start of any bellwether trial remains months away at best, the court and the parties are slowly but surely moving ahead through these thorny issues.
In addition to Atrium, Maquet Cardiovascular US Sales also is a named defendant in the MDL. According to the Long-Form Complaint, "Since October of 2011, Atrium has operated within, and as a business unit of, Maquet."
The MDL involves a variety of C-QUR products, which, per the Short-Form Complaint, include the following:
• C-QUR Mosaic
• C-QUR Edge
• C-QUR TacShield
• C-QUR Lite Mesh V-Patch
• C-QUR Mesh V-Path
• Other C-QUR mesh products
Atrium designed C-QUR mesh for use in hernia repair surgeries, and the devices are intended to be permanently implanted into the human body. Like some other hernia mesh devices, C-QUR is made of polypropylene; however, unlike other mesh products, C-QUR mesh "has a unique Omega 3 fatty acid gel coating derived from fish oil...which is not used in any other hernia repair product sold in the United States," according to the Long-Form Complaint.
While Atrium claimed that this novel coating would "minimize adhesion and inflammation, and facilitate incorporation of the mesh into the body", plaintiffs allege that, in fact, the opposite was true: "Instead, the Omega 3 coating prevented adequate incorporation of the mesh into the body causing an intense inflammatory and chronic foreign body response, that resulted in an adverse tissue reaction, including damage to surrounding tissue," according to the complaint.
Remember to check back at TheLawFirm.com for all the latest updates on Atrium C-QUR mesh litigation. And if you have suffered serious complications following the implantation of a surgical mesh product, contact TheLawFirm.com for a free legal consultation!
United States District Court District of New Hampshire. (Accessed 7 May 2021). Court Docket. In Re: Atrium Medical Corp. C-Qur Mesh Products Liability Litigation. Case No. 1:16-md-02753-LM. MDL No. 2753
United States District Court District of New Hampshire. (1 March 2021). Amended Order. In Re: Atrium Medical Corp. C-Qur Mesh Products Liability Litigation. Case No. 1:16-md-02753-LM. MDL No. 2753
United States District Court District of New Hampshire. (27 December 2019). Short-Form Complaint. In Re: Atrium Medical Corp. C-Qur Mesh Products Liability Litigation. Case No. 1:16-md-02753-LM. MDL No. 2753
United States District Court District of New Hampshire. (27 December 2019). Long-Form Complaint. In Re: Atrium Medical Corp. C-Qur Mesh Products Liability Litigation. Case No. 1:16-md-02753-LM. MDL No. 2753
Legal Disclaimer: The information in this article is not intended to be used as medical information or diagnosis. The sources of the information presented in the article have been researched and are linked within the article. Please seek out medical advice from a licensed medical professional if you are experiencing a problem with any of the drugs or devices mentioned in this article.
About TheLawFirm.com (TLF)
TheLawFirm.com is a group of award winning attorneys, paralegals and associates from the legal profession who’s main goal is to educate and represent their clients with the utmost expertise, respect and trust.
We also work closely with a large group of experts from the medical profession so we can draw upon their expertise, in order to present as much accurate information relating to various mass tort and personal injury lawsuits as we can.