San Diego, CA (PRWEB) April 16, 2014
Resource4thePeople today announced that there has been an important new development of interest to consumers considering joining litigation* in which patients allege suffering serious side effects as a result of having Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II hip implants.
The judge who has been assigned to oversee such lawsuits filed across the country has issued a new order which streamlines the process in which Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II hip implant lawsuits may be filed, according to the court file.
"What the judge has done is issue an order to minimize delays associated with transfer of actions involving these products that are pending in other federal district courts to this multidistrict litigation," said Resource4thePeople.
"This will promote judicial efficiency and permit attorneys who are not admitted to practice before his court to file such actions on behalf of their clients.
"This will also allow us to more speedily process lawsuits filed on behalf of consumers who continue to take advantage of our policy of free consultations to those who contact us about their eligibility to file a claim over these allegations."
These complimentary consultations were initiated soon after the Food and Drug Administration announced on July 6, 2012 that the Stryker Corporation had voluntarily recalled its Rejuvenate and ABG II modular-neck stems.**
"These risks include the potential for fretting and/or corrosion at or about the modular-neck junction, which may result in adverse local tissue reaction as well as possible pain and/or swelling, in or around your hip," Stryker said in a warning to patients.***
"Since the recall announcement there have been hundreds of lawsuits* filed by patients who are alleging that they suffered these problems as well as more severe health issues and we are encouraged to report important developments in this litigation," said Resource4thePeople.
The multidistrict litigation is being overseen by overseen by Judge Donovan W. Frank in the U.S. District Court for Minnesota, who is presiding over pre-trial evidence gathering and other actions in the litigation.
The latest federal court statistics show that the number of cases consolidated before Judge Frank has climbed to 613 as of the latest reporting period ending March 17, 2014.****
The federal multidistrict panel that assigned the cases to the judge 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 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- 2441 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