Preview Newsletter
Ethicon May 12
-
Endo Settles 100 Vaginal Mesh Suits
May 11, 2015 | Law360
By Emily Field
Endo International PLC on Monday reached settlement agreements with more than 100 plaintiffs in the multidistrict litigation over its subsidiary American Medical Systems Inc.'s allegedly harmful vaginal mesh products, according to the judge’s order dismissing the suits. -
*New* Sanchez v. Boston Scientific Case Settles Before Closing Arguments
May 11, 2015 | Mesh Medical Device News Desk
By Jane Akre
Mesh News Desk has confirmed that the federal bellwether trial of Sanchez v. Boston Scientific settled Monday morning before the Los Angeles jury heard closing arguments.
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
Online Sources
-
Endo Settles 100 Vaginal Mesh Suits
May 11, 2015 | Law360
By Emily Field
Endo International PLC on Monday reached settlement agreements with more than 100 plaintiffs in the multidistrict litigation over its subsidiary American Medical Systems Inc.'s allegedly harmful vaginal mesh products, according to the judge’s order dismissing the suits.
U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin said that he’d been informed by counsel that the approximately 108 plaintiffs had reached a settlement with Endo and that the the parties had until April 2016 to submit an agreed order of dismissal with prejudice; otherwise, the cases will be dismissed without prejudice. Last month, Endo had told the judge that it had “compromised and settled all claims” with about 360 cases.
The judge’s order did not include details of the settlements.
In about 30 of the cases settled in April, the plaintiffs had asserted claims against other companies, including Boston Scientific Corp. and C.R. Bard Inc., which Endo requested be transferred to those respective MDLs.
In September, Endo announced that it reached master settlements with a number of plaintiffs, resolving “substantially all” of the claims in the case without admitting any liability or fault.
Last year, the company announced it would pay $830 million to settle "a substantial majority" of the lawsuits related to AMS' vaginal mesh devices.
In April 2014, Endo said that it had reached agreements in principle with several plaintiffs' firms — including Motley Rice LLC, Blasingame Burch Garrard & Ashley PC, Levin Simes LLP and Clark Love & Hutson GP — to resolve some 20,000 claims in the ongoing litigation. Plaintiffs in the suits have claimed that the vaginal mesh devices at issue are defective and have caused chronic pain, incontinence and other injuries.
Endo had previously said that it anticipated it would cost at least $520 million to settle or otherwise exit the product liability litigation it faces, which primarily consists of vaginal mesh injury cases. In June 2013, the company agreed to pay $54.5 million to settle an unspecified number of the vaginal mesh claims.
Rajiv De Silva, president and chief executive officer of Endo, said in September that the deals will allow the company to continue to invest in the growth of its business segments and pursue mergers and acquisitions.
"We are very pleased to resolve substantially all of the remaining U.S. vaginal mesh litigation claims facing our AMS business," De Silva said in a statement at the time. “We believe that these settlements will also allow the AMS business to continue its return to growth and enhance focus on the operations and profitability of this leading medical device franchise."
The announcement came a day after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued two proposed orders that would reclassify surgical mesh for transvaginal repair of pelvic organ prolapse as a high-risk device and require manufacturers to apply for pre-market approval with the agency.
The two orders would address the health risks associated with the mesh, which is used to treat women whose internal structures become so weak or broken that their pelvic organs drop from their normal position and bulge into the vagina. The surgical mesh is classified as a moderate-risk device, the agency said at the time of the orders.
The settling plaintiffs are represented by The Potts Law Firm, Farrell White & Legg andBailey Perrin Bailey.
AMS is represented by Barbara Binis and Tracy Weiss of Reed Smith LLP and Michael Farrell and Erik Legg of Farrell White & Legg PLLC.
The multidistrict litigation is In re: American Medical Systems Inc. Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation, case number 2:12-md-02325, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia. -
*New* Sanchez v. Boston Scientific Case Settles Before Closing Arguments
May 11, 2015 | Mesh Medical Device News Desk
By Jane Akre
Mesh News Desk has confirmed that the federal bellwether trial of Sanchez v. Boston Scientificsettled Monday morning before the Los Angeles jury heard closing arguments.
The defective product case began one week ago and represented the sixth trial facing the Massachusetts-based mesh maker. Monday, May 11, a Delaware court began hearing the defective mesh case ofBarba v. Boston Scientific over its Advantage Fit mesh sling. See story on Mesh News Desk here.While the terms of a settlement are never disclosed, Boston Scientific suffered the largest of the mesh verdicts losses before a jury – $73 million – in the September case of Martha Salazar. The jury also found Boston Scientific was “grossly negligent.” That amount included $50 million in punitive damages.
Last November, the company lost two separate federal trials alleging the company made defective pelvic mesh – one in West Virginia where jurors delivered an $18.5 million verdict to four plaintiffs plus an additional $1 million in punitive damages. The jurors there too concluded the company acted with “gross negligence.”
In a Miami federal court, four women injured by the company’s Pinnacle mesh, were collectively awarded $26.7 million.
The story filed earlier today continues here:
The trial of Roseanne Sanchez v. Boston Scientific was in its sixth day today in a Los Angeles courtroom (Sanchez v. Boston Scientific 2:12-cv-05762). The bellwether case was remanded back to the Central District of California from West Virginia where the company is facing nearly 17,000 pelvic mesh cases.
Jim M. Perdue, Perdue & Kidd
During opening arguments May 5, Sanchez’ attorney Jim Perdue told the jury that Ms. Sanchez had no idea the company had not safety tested the meshes she had received – a Pinnacle Pelvic Floor Repair Kit (to treat pelvic organ prolapse) and the Advantage Transvaginal Mid-Urethral Sling System (to treat incontinence).
Law 360 reports the Pinnacle Sanchez received was made of a different formula of polypropylene and was a different shape than the previous models of Pinnacle.
“She had no idea that no human testing had been done,” said Jim M. Purdue Jr. of Purdue and Kidd LLP. “The choices that Boston Scientific made are what brought us here today.”
Perdue said the company use polypropylene mesh despite a material warning it was not to be used for permanently implanted medical devices, and the company had no “exit strategy” in case there was a problem. In other words, the procedure was irreversible.
As a result, Ms. Sanchez has experienced pain, bleeding and infections among other complications, according to her complaint.
Pinnacle mesh kit
The plaintiffs claim the Pinnacle and Advantage are defective, a ruling that has already been issued by another jury in a federal trial in Miami last November. (See Eghnayem case here).
An attorney for Boston Scientific, Robert Adams of Shook Hardy & Bacon, told jurors Ms. Sanchez is a nurse to patients undergoing chemotherapy and understands well the informed consent conversation. She also had medical problems before her mesh implants, he said.
The Pinnacle is no longer on the market. TheAdvantage and Advantage Fit, a newer version, remain on the market.
Judge John H. Walter ordered a shortened proceeding of five days. Under the federal multidistrict litigation overseen by Judge Joseph Goodwin in Charleston, proceedings had already been shortened to two weeks. The Sanchez case was transferred to the Central District of California February 23rd.
Judge Walter is known to run a tight ship and according to this online site, The Robing Room, where judges are judged, there are many complaints about The Honorable John F. Walter.
Dr. Kerri Wiltchik, Ob-Gyn implanting doc
In an April 22 filing, both sides disputed jury instructions that would apportion fault to her implanting doctor, Dr. Kerri Wiltchik. Boston Scientific was considering presenting evidence that the surgeon was negligent.
As of this date, there are 16,753 cases consolidated in federal court in Charleston, WV in multidistrict litigation and 100,000 cases filed against seven mesh makers. #
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
Online Sources
Add recipients
Suggested