New Alleged Transvaginal Mesh Complications Lawsuits Update: Resource4thePeople Reports Litigation Moves Forward as Some Defendants Dismissed

Resource4thePeople announces increase in staff providing free consultations to consumers over claims of allegedly suffering serious health problems from devices that may have failed.

  • Share on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedInEmail a friend

San Diego, CA (PRWEB) June 13, 2013

http://www.resource4thepeople.com/defectivemedicaldevices/transvaginal-mesh-lawsuit.html

In its latest update to consumers about transvaginal mesh failure lawsuits that have been consolidated in federal court Resource4thePeople reports today that some defendants have been dismissed from the litigation, according to court documents.

However, Resource4thePeople also reports that the majority of the manufacturers who are defending themselves against the allegations remain intact, according to the court files in the multidistrict litigation. A comprehensive list is provided below.

“This is part of the normal sequence of events in multidistrict litigations with multiple defendants,” said Resource4thePeople. “As the litigation continues to move forward the judge will continue to decide which plaintiffs and defendants remain in the litigation.

“We are pleased to report this progress and will continue to provide consumers with updates about these legal proceedings in which federal lawsuits allege that women suffered serious complications as a result of having these devices implanted in their bodies.”

Resource4thePeople also is announcing an increase in the staffing of personnel from its nationwide network of lawyers in order to handle the consumer demand from alleged victims seeking information about their legal rights.

The most recent ruling handed down in U.S. District Court in the Southern District of West Virginia* involves the dismissal of lawsuits against Coloplast Corp., Coloplast A/S, and Coloplast Manufacturing US.

The ruling was made by U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin, who is presiding over the multidistrict litigation in which lawsuits from across the country involving similar allegations about transvaginal mesh products have been consolidated.

Resource4thePeople also is providing consumers an outline of the remaining transvaginal mesh litigations that have been consolidated and remain under the jurisdiction of the judge:

  •     In re: American Medical Systems, Inc., Pelvic Repair Systems Products Liability Litigation (MDL-2325)
  •     In re: Boston Scientific Corp., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation (MDL-2326)
  •     In re: C. R. Bard, Inc. Pelvic System Products Liability Litigation (MDL-2187)
  •     In re: Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation (MDL-2327)

The lawsuits involve allegations that mesh products that were implanted in women’s bodies to treat pelvic organ prolapse or incontinence failed and caused them to suffer serious side effects, including infections, organ damage, vaginal pain and other health problems, according to the court files.

The West Virginia cases are one of several multi-district litigations involving transvaginal mesh, including one in New Jersey in which Bloomberg News reported on Feb. 28, 2013** that a jury awarded over $11 million in compensatory and damages to a South Dakota woman.

Resource4thePeople said that the total verdict of $11.1 million against pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson and its Ethicon subsidiary has generated such a significant number of inquiries from transvaginal mesh patients that additional lawyers are now available to assist other women who may have suffered similar complications.

The additions will enable Resource4thePeople's national network of lawyers to continue to offer free legal consultations to consumers inquiring about their legal options involving allegations of transvaginal mesh complications.

The South Dakota woman's lawsuit*** was the first to go to trial from among 2,100 transvaginal mesh lawsuits consolidated in New Jersey.

The Bloomberg News report said lawyers for the woman, Linda Gross, told jurors the defendants failed to warn the woman's surgeon of the risks of its Gynecare Prolift implant and fraudulently misled her about the risks.

According to the court file in the case, the 47-year-old Gross filed allegations complaining of constant pain and said she was forced to undergo 18 operations to repair abdominal injuries she suffered after having the device implanted to treat her pelvic organ prolapse.

Resource4thePeople spokesman William Howell said consumers are often inquiring about whether it is too late to file a lawsuit on their behalf.

"The answer, in most cases, is no," said Howell. "Every case is different, however, and the easiest solution is for consumers to contact us for a legal consultation."

Resource4thePeople also is recommending that women who have suffered health problems from transvaginal mesh products familiarize themselves with Food and Drug Administration warnings of “serious complications associated with transvaginal placement of surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse."****

In the warning issued to health care professionals, the FDA cited recent medical literature which revealed that:

  •     Mesh used in transvaginal POP repair introduces risks not present in traditional non-mesh surgery for POP repair.
  •     Mesh placed abdominally for POP repair appears to result in lower rates of mesh complications compared to transvaginal POP surgery with mesh.
  •     There is no evidence that transvaginal repair to support the top of the vagina (apical repair) or the back wall of the vagina (posterior repair) with mesh provides any added benefit compared to traditional surgery without mesh.
  •     While transvaginal surgical repair to correct weakened tissue between the bladder and vagina (anterior repair) with mesh augmentation may provide an anatomic benefit compared to traditional POP repair without mesh, this anatomic benefit may not result in better symptomatic results.

Sources:

** http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-28/j-j-owes-7-76-million-in-punitives-in-vaginal-mesh-case.html
***Gross v. Gynecare Inc., Atl-L-6966-10, Superior Court of Atlantic County, New Jersey (Atlantic City)
****http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/AlertsandNotices/ucm262435


Contact

  • Bill Callahan
    iLawSuit
    858 602-2749
    Email