San Diego, CA (PRWEB) March 03, 2014
Resource4thePeople announced today its latest update for consumers who are following litigation* in which patients are alleging that they suffered serious side effects as a result of having Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II hip implants.
There have been several recent developments in a special multidistrict litigation in which Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II hip implant lawsuits* seeking compensation from patients from across the country have been consolidated before a federal judge in Minnesota.
U.S. District Judge Donovan W. Frank recently met with attorneys for the plaintiffs and defendant in the case for an update about the progress of the litigation, which is now in the pre-trial evidence-gathering stage, according to the court file in the case.
Meanwhile, the latest case file statistics provided by the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation shows that the number of cases** that have been consolidated before Judge Frank has climbed to 576 as of the latest reporting period ending Feb. 19, 2014.
"The increase in the number of cases before the judge corresponds with the increasing number of inquiries we are receiving from consumers seeking their legal options to seek compensation over allegations similar to those before the judge," said Resource4thePeople.
"As a result, we are proud to announce that our national network of attorneys will continue to provide free consultations to all consumers who contact us about their eligibility to file a claim over these allegations."
The multidistrict panel, in consolidating the litigation, summarized*** the plaintiffs’ claims as focusing upon the performance of these products, particularly allegations that the hip replacement devices cause fretting and corrosion at the modular-neck junction and fail early:
“On the basis of the papers filed and the hearing session held, we find that these actions involve common questions of fact, and that centralization will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.,” the panel wrote in assigning the case to Judge Frank.
“The actions share factual questions concerning design, manufacture, marketing and performance of Stryker’s recalled Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II modular-neck stems. Centralization will eliminate duplicative discovery, prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings on discovery and other issues, and conserve the resources of the parties, their counsel and the judiciary.”
Stryker recalled the two systems in July, 2012, posting on the company website**** that they systems were being recalled because of severe side effects, some of which, according to allegations made in Stryker hip implant lawsuits can cause metallosis, in which the body can be poisoned by metal particles flaking off the systems.
Here is part of the recall posting:
"In June 2012, Stryker initiated a voluntary recall of its Rejuvenate and ABG II modular-neck hip stems. While modular-neck hip stems provide surgeons with an option to correct certain aspects of a patient’s anatomy and hip biomechanics, we decided to voluntarily recall these modular-neck hip systems due to the potential for fretting and corrosion at the modular-neck junction which may result in ALTR (adverse local tissue reactions), as well as possible pain and/or swelling at or around the hip."
Resource4thePeople also is offering free consultations to consumers who allegedly suffered similar side effects from DePuy Orthopaedics metal-on-metal hip implants. Those systems also have been recalled after two trials involving allegations that DePuy metal-on-metal hip implants can cause serious side effects the company has decided it will no longer sell metal-on-metal hip implants.
Bloomberg News reported***** on May 17, 2013 that DePuy's parent company, Johnson & Johnson, made the announcement after two trials in which one jury****** awarded a plaintiff $8.3 million in damages and a second trial******* in which a jury found in favor of DePuy.
Resource4thePeople said that, "Even though Johnson & Johnson announced its decision to halt sales its national team of attorneys will continue to accept new cases over allegations that DePuy metal-on-metal hip implants caused serious side effects."
"The company's decision does not affect the legal rights of consumers to seek compensation for side effects that they allege were caused by metal-on-metal hip implant systems that are the subject of a huge multi-district litigation******** that is still underway," said Resource4thePeople.
In its posting, Bloomberg reported that "metal-on-metal hip sales in the U.S. and Europe plunged from 20 percent of the market in 2007 to less than 2 percent last year as doctors questioned their safety and patients filed lawsuits citing flawed products. The global hip-implant market may be $5.7 billion in 2013, according to Lawrence Biegelsen, an analyst at Wells Fargo in New York. U.S. regulators earlier this year requested extensive study of all metal-on-metal hips."
In the first U.S. trial****** involving the DePuy metal systems allegations, a Los Angeles jury found on March 8, 2013 that DePuy and its parent company, Johnson & Johnson must pay a Montana man $8.3 in damages on a finding that the DePuy ASR system was defectively designed.
*13-MDL- 441 IN RE: Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II Hip Implant Products Liability Litigation, U.S. District Court for Minnesota, Judge Donovan W. Frank
******Kransky v. DePuy, BC456086, California Superior Court, Los Angeles County (Los Angeles).
*******Strum v. DePuy, 2011-L-9352, Circuit Court of Cook County, Chicago, Illinois.
********In re: DePuy Orthopaedics Inc., ASR Hip Implant Products Liability Litigation, MDL-2197, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio