Georgia Transvaginal Mesh Attorney Requests Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to Include All Bard Female Pelvic Repair Products in Pending MDL

Share Article

In a recently filed motion, Georgia attorney Henry Garrard III of Blasingame, Burch, Garrard & Ashley, P.C., says the Southern District of West Virginia would provide an appropriate forum for handling all cases involving the transvaginal surgical mesh devices sold by C.R. Bard, Inc.

Athens, Georgia, transvaginal mesh, surgical mesh, mesh kits, lawyer, attorney, law firm, personal injury, product liability, medical device, medical products

Henry G. Garrard III

The Avaulta MDL pending before Judge Goodwin involves similar uses in the same area of the female anatomy as the other (non-Avaulta) Bard Women’s Pelvic Repair products.

The Georgia law firm that has been heavily involved in transvaginal mesh litigation across the U.S. has filed a motion with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to bring several lawsuits involving Bard women’s pelvic repair products into one federal court where related cases are already pending for pretrial proceedings.

In a September 15 motion, Georgia defective medical products attorney Henry Garrard III of the Athens, Georgia-based Blasingame, Burch, Garrard & Ashley, P.C., asked the MDL Panel to transfer 29 product liability actions against C.R. Bard, Inc., and several subsidiaries of Covidien, plc, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.

The motion also asked the Panel to expand In re Avaulta Pelvic Support Systems Product Liability Litigation (MDL No. 2187), a multidistrict litigation (MDL) case which has been pending in the Southern District of West Virginia before the Hon. Joseph R. Goodwin since October 2010, to include additional Bard mesh products.

The motion states that consolidating the cases would reduce, if not eliminate, the inconvenience and inefficiency of having to litigate related claims in different jurisdictions. The motion also claims that the cases raise common questions of fact relating to the Bard women’s pelvic repair products.

“The Avaulta MDL pending before Judge Goodwin involves similar uses in the same area of the female anatomy as the other (non-Avaulta) Bard Women’s Pelvic Repair products,” wrote Garrard, managing partner of Blasingame, Burch, Garrard & Ashley, P.C., and lead counsel for the plaintiffs in the Avaulta MDL.

“Based on the similarities between these Bard Women’s Pelvic Repair product cases and those already in the Avaulta MDL, Judge Goodwin has had an opportunity to become familiar with the parties, their respective counsel, as well as many of the factual and legal issues,” he added.

Garrard and his law firm have been involved in transvaginal mesh litigation since 2006. He previously served as lead counsel for the plaintiffs in another multidistrict litigation case involving surgical mesh products, In Re Mentor Corp. ObTape Transobturator Sling Products Liability Litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia (MDL No. 2004).

The cases which the firm seeks to transfer involve 46 plaintiffs in surgical mesh product liability actions that have been filed in federal district courts in Indiana, Georgia and Florida.

According to the motion, the cases all involve women – and, in some cases, their husbands – who claim to have suffered serious injuries from the surgical mesh products Pelvicol, PelviLace, PelviSoft, Pelvitex, Uretex and / or Align products, which were implanted in the female pelvic region for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) or stress urinary incontinence (SUI).

The motion claims that all of these surgical mesh products – referred to in the motion as “Bard Women’s Pelvic Repair Products” – were sold and distributed in the U.S. exclusively by C.R. Bard, Inc., and were designed and manufactured by Bard or one or more subsidiaries of Covidien, plc, including: Covidien International Finance, S.A.; Floreane Medical Implants; Covidien Trevoux; Mareane; Sofradim Production; and Tissue Science Laboratories, Ltd.

According to the motion, the plaintiffs allege that the defendants defectively designed and manufactured the transvaginal mesh products and failed to provide appropriate warnings and instructions regarding the risks and dangers posed by the medical devices.

In July, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a safety communication stating that the agency had received numerous reports of transvaginal mesh products that had caused patients to suffer pain, infection, bleeding, scarring, pain during sexual intercourse, organ perforation and urinary problems that required additional treatment and hospitalization.

The cases currently in the Southern District of West Virginia in the Avaulta MDL involve three other Bard-sold pelvic mesh products – the Avaulta Biosynthetic, Avaulta Plus and Avaulta Solo – as well as one or more of the non-Avaulta women’s pelvic repair products, the motion states.

Along with local counsel in cases filed outside of Georgia, the transvaginal mesh attorneys from Blasingame, Burch, Garrard & Ashley, P.C., represent all of the plaintiffs in the cases at issue in the motion.

About Blasingame, Burch, Garrard & Ashley, P.C.

Blasingame, Burch, Garrard & Ashley, P.C. is an Athens, Georgia-based law firm that has been widely recognized for its ethics, skill and professionalism by Martindale-Hubbell®, The Best Lawyers in America, American College of Trial Lawyers, Super Lawyers and Law & Politics Media/Atlanta Magazine. Since 2006, the firm’s defective medical device and product liability lawyers have pursued claims involving defective transvaginal mesh products, including handling attorney referrals from co-counsel across the country. For more information, call the firm at (866) 354-3544 or use its online contact form.

###

Share article on social media or email:

View article via:

Pdf Print

Contact Author

Josh B. Wages

Mike Dayton
Visit website