Medical device manufacturer C.R. Bard recently lost an opportunity to avoid IVC filter MDL lawsuits filed by patients and family members.
The medical device company was looking to avoid multidistrict litigation from family members who alleged that their loved ones were killed or injured by the defective vascular filters.
The IVC filter MDL was upheld by an Arizona federal judge who said that the state law claims were not preempted by laws on the books at the federal level. This means the lawsuit will proceed on behalf of the injured patients.
The federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act’s medical device amendments are only applicable, according to the judge, when the FDA has put specific requirements on any medical device outside of what is typically required by the approval procedures.
According to the U.S. District Judge on the case, the IVC filter MDL should move ahead because these additional requirements were never placed on the device to begin with.
Inside the IVC filter MDL case, more than 17 causes of actions including failure to recall, fraudulent misrepresentation, consumer fraud, wrongful death and negligence are outlined..
The IVC MDL was consolidated in 2015 and involves more than 3,000 personal injury lawsuits filed against C.R. Bard.
The suits all allege that the inferior vena cava filters will eventually malfunction and do not serve the purpose of preventing blood clots from entering the heart or the lungs. The IVC filter MDL lawsuits argue that the filters are defective because they have a high chance of perforating the IVC, tilting, migrating, and fracturing or impacting neighboring organs.
IVC filters from other brands, however, have also been subject to scrutiny. Many of them have been named in lawsuits as well after patients experienced pain and other side effects. Users claim that the IVC filters are not made safely enough for long-term use in a patient’s body and that removing them after the patient experiences pain can be difficult if the filter has begun to break down, posing its own set of risks.
Company Accused of Keeping Patient Risks Out of Public Eye
The medical device company, according to these lawsuits, was aware of these risks and did not warn medical professionals or patients about them. C.R. Bard filed a motion for summary judgement in large, arguing that all the lawsuits’ claims were preempted by the MDA.
If you or someone you know has been injured due to an IVC filter that has migrated, fractured, or otherwise caused injury, you may have grounds to pursue a personal injury claim with the help of an experienced attorney.
The lawyers at McDonald Worley are currently investigating claims on behalf of those who have been injured by an IVC filter. Schedule a free consultation today.