allege that Mirena IUD may migrate away from its original position, perforate the uterus and/or cause related injuries.
San Diego, CA (PRWEB) April 30, 2013
AttorneyOne.com, a recognized authority on law, updated the website recently and they are now actively providing expert opinion in view of the recent news on Mirena IUD and potential Mirena IUD Class Action Lawsuits.
Thomson Reuters reported on April 24, 2013 that more than 40 personal injury lawsuits were consolidated in the Mirena IUD Multidistrict Litigation (MDL 2434, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York). The Mirena IUD, manufactured by Bayer, is an intrauterine device (IUD) that is inserted into the uterus as a contraceptive method.
On April 8 the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ordered the centralization of federal lawsuits alleging injuries caused by Mirena IUD in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (MDL 2434). The cases in the Multidistrict Litigation allege that Mirena IUD may migrate away from its original position, perforate the uterus and/or cause related injuries.
In October 2009, the FDA informed that the most serious adverse reactions reported in patients using Mirena for any indication included ectopic pregnancy, intrauterine pregnancy, pelvic inflammatory disease, and perforation of the uterine wall or cervix, among others.
Taking into consideration the latest developments, AttorneyOne.com updated the website and, now, can actively provide an expert opinion including how to get in contact with legal counsel easily and inexpensively in case of alleged Mirena IUD severe complications. Sean Burke, director of Media Relations at AttorneyOne.com, adds that the relevant information illustrates that people continue to file Mirena IUD lawsuits. "For that reason", he continues, "our focus should squarely fall on getting the word out and assisting people in finding the right legal assistance.”
On February 21, 2013 a woman filed a lawsuit in New York Southern District Court (case no. 7:2013cv01168) alleging she suffered uterine perforation from Mirena IUD. Plaintiff claims she had the Mirena IUD inserted into her uterus in 2009 and in 2011 she learned that she had allegedly suffered a uterine perforation by her device. Laparoscopic surgery was performed to remove the intrauterine device.
AttorneyOne.com has further information on Mirena IUD lawsuits including how to get in contact with legal counsel.
Headquartered in San Diego, CA Attorney One was founded in 2004 and is not a law firm. They offer a nationwide legal service which helps consumers find the best representation for their legal needs. You can learn more about Attorney One at our website http://www.attorneyone.com. You can also find us on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/AttorneyOne. Checkout earlier news from us at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/4/prweb10678721.htm