News Feed Discussions Big picture – Litigation – Perfix plug

  • Big picture – Litigation – Perfix plug

    Posted by Good intentions on July 3, 2022 at 12:54 pm

    There are plenty of internet sites around that talk about litigation but I found this one, linked below, that seems very straightforward and reasonable in reporting progress.

    One specific thing that is interesting in this latest update is the mention of the Perfix plug. Most of the hernia mesh litigation seeks to find a defect in the actual product itself, Like the use of fish oil on the Atrium mesh, under the assumption that the use of mesh itself is not the source of pain and suffering. But there is a case that mentions just the Bard Perfix plug as the cause.

    IT is a well-written summary of what’s happening overall. The links in the document are interesting also and have updates up to July 1 2022.

    Bard is now owned by Becton Dickinson.

    https://www.lawsuit-information-center.com/bard-hernia-mesh-lawsuits.html

    Good intentions replied 8 months ago 4 Members · 35 Replies
  • 35 Replies
  • Good intentions

    Member
    September 26, 2023 at 8:55 am

    Here’s another interesting summary that gets in to the details of the premise being suggested for the problems. They distinguish between polyester and polypropylene. Some of it seems exaggerated but I guess that’s what lawyers do. Looks like they have their sights set on Progrip also.

    It’s like reading an exciting novel in serial form.

    https://nighgoldenberg.com/covidien-hernia-mesh-lawsuit/

  • Good intentions

    Member
    September 26, 2023 at 8:47 am

    Here’s a summary of the Covidien MDL. Parietex is a brand name used for many mesh products including the common flat mesh sold by Medtronic.

    https://www.aboutlawsuits.com/covidien-mesh-lawsuits-bellwether-trials/

    https://www.medtronic.com/covidien/en-us/products/hernia-repair/mesh-products.html

  • Good intentions

    Member
    September 26, 2023 at 8:43 am

    It has been pretty fascinating to follow the progress of the lawsuits focused on various hernia mesh products. Also kind of difficult since the various law firms that report on them generally don’t present information very well.

    One thing I’ve noticed is that they seem to be working from a starting assumption that all mesh products are inherently “good” and that they need to find a specific defect in material or manufacturing proce4ss to show a failure on the corporation’s part. Instead of just showing that the products available are generally deficient and inadequate and that the benefits are oversold, and that the corporations know this but are letting the harm continue. They should be taking the J&J talc/asbestos path, or the tobacco or oil company strategy and showing that the corporations are valuing profits over public damage.

    This summary page shows some of that. Apparently one of the cases tried to use a fire in a manufacturing plant as evidence of negligence. Instead of just showing that it’s a bad design that even the global “guidelines” recommend against.

    Anyway, it’s just one benefit of getting tangled up in this mess. A new form of entertainment.

    Apparently there is a new class action suit against Medtronic for their Covidien mesh. It slipped in over the last year, didn’t even notice it.

    https://www.lawsuit-information-center.com/how-much-compensation-can-you-expect-for-a-hernia-mesh-lawsuit.html

    “…

    September 23, 2023 – Coviden MDL Has Trial Dates… in 2025
    The federal judge overseeing Covidien hernia mesh lawsuits in federal courts nationwide has given approval to a proposal for preparing six bellwether cases and selecting two of them for trial in early 2025. While progress has been somewhat slow in this litigation and 2025 seems like light years away, getting a trial date gets the clock moving on pushing Coviden to make meaningful settlement offers for the over 600 plaintiffs in this litigation.

    While the facts are different, this litigation is tied in the Bard MDL psychologically. A big verdict in Stinson next month would not only help the Bard plaintiffs but the other hernia mesh class actions as well.

    October 28, 2022 Covidien Mesh Lawsuit Update
    At a recent status conference in the Covidien hernia mesh class action MDL, the parties advised Judge Patti Saris (D. Mass.) that 170 Covidien hernia mesh cases are currently pending in federal courts, 5,700 lawsuits pending against Covidien in Massachusetts state courts (Covidien’s home state). The central issue at the status conference was the proposed discovery plan submitted by Covidien. The plaintiffs’ committee is vehemently opposed to the proposal because it would give them under one year to complete corporate discovery.
    …”

  • Good intentions

    Member
    September 7, 2023 at 8:31 am

    Here is the latest on the Bard MDL. A case starts in about five weeks. It’s interesting that the Bryan v. C.R. Bard Inc. case is actually about transvaginal mesh. So the legal profession sees the mesh design and/or the material itself (polypropylene) as the source of the problems. As a materials person myself, I think that it’s probably more product design than material. But, broadly, the products as they exist today are not good enough. The medical device makers need to start considering the cost of damages versus the cost of research. It might be time to make a new investment in future products instead of coasting on what used to be easy 510(k) money.

    From the link in the post above –

    “September 1, 2023: After a very long wait, it looks like the next bellwether test trial in the Bard hernia mesh MDL is finally going to happen. In a new Case Management Order issued yesterday, the MDL Judge confirmed that trial in the case of Stinson v. Davol, Inc., et al. (18-cv-1022) will begin on October 16, 2023. A fourth bellwether trial will be scheduled for early 2024 in the case of Bryan v. C.R. Bard Inc., et al. (18-cv-1440).”

  • Good intentions

    Member
    August 17, 2023 at 7:48 am

    The web site that I had been using to keep track of litigation seems to be slipping. I found another that seems to be up-to-date.

    https://www.millerandzois.com/products-liability/hernia-mesh-case-value/

    “…
    August 16, 2023: The Bard MDL has been frustratingly quiet in August. The MDL did add 191 new cases last month, increasing the total case count for the 3rd largest MDL in the country to added to 20,126 lawsuits.

    August 10, 2023: The pivotal 3rd bellwether test trial is on track to begin on October 16, 2023 in the case of Stinson v. C.R. Bard, et al. (2:18-cv-01022). In preparation for that upcoming trial, the MDL Judge recently issued an Order setting last-minute discovery deadlines related to the plaintiff’s post-operative treatment last month. The order gives the parties until August 14, 2023, to complete supplemental fact depositions and until September 27 to finish additional expert depositions. The short time frame of these deadlines suggests that the judge is committed to going to trial in October without further delays.
    …”

  • William Bryant

    Member
    August 2, 2023 at 11:42 am

    Thanks Good Intentions..it’s good you keep us up to date on the legal cases.

    Bankruptcy seems an easy way out and negates any need to defend their product/s. Which if as good as we are told, you’d think they’d be delighted to do.

  • Good intentions

    Member
    August 2, 2023 at 10:45 am

    Here is an interesting story about how the big corporations try to avoid liability for faulty products. I’ve posted about it before. If this type of maneuver succeeds then corporations can just rake in the money from bad products until the lawsuits build up, then split the division off and declare bankruptcy. Johnson & Johnson owns Ethicon, one of the big hernia mesh product suppliers.

    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-jjs-texas-two-step-setback-could-make-it-harder-for-companies-to-shed-lawsuits-151757231.html

  • Good intentions

    Member
    June 27, 2023 at 10:58 am

    Nothing substantial on the Updates. As I have noted in two other threads, Medtronic and BD have both introduced new polypropylene products to market. Progrip Polypropylene, and Bard 3d Max MID. I think that the damaged patients and the litigation are just calculated in to the price of the products. These are not companies that exist for the betterment of humanity’s health. They’re just business ventures.

    From the link in the post above –

    “June 12, 2023 Update
    Bard continues to struggle with product liability lawsuits. The latest is the Bard PowerPort device which provides a port for patients to receive medication without the need to start a fresh IV. Like the hermia mesh claims, Bard PowerPort lawsuits involve allegations that the device was poorly made.

    June 5, 2023 Update
    Bard no longer believes Stinton should go to trial. Why? Because it says the plaintiff’s injuries have escalated to the point where it is no longer a good bellwether trial. Bard is saying we want to avoid a significant verdict in Stinson because that will lead to greater settlement expectations.

    This is nonsense. The first two bellwether trials were not great cases for plaintiffs, so those cases could be said to be unrepresentative. This tactic coincides nicely with Bard’s strategy of prolonging the process, which aims to hold onto their capital as long as they can, with the hope that persistent delays will persuade plaintiffs to settle for smaller settlement payouts when this ordeal finally reaches a resolution. Should the judge agree to postpone the Stinson trial – and the bet here is that he will not – that will cause even greater delay to get the next case ready for trial.

    June 1, 2023 Update
    As many of you reading this know all too well, mass tort lawsuits can move slowly. Some plaintiffs try to make arguments to steer clear of a class action lawsuit to pursue an independent claim. In Vaughn, et al. v. Kentuckiana Surgical Specialists, P.S.C., et al., plainitff filed a hernia mesh lawsuit in the Western District of Kentucky to the Southern District of Ohio. She asked to stay out of the Bard MDL because the transfer would cause inconvenience to them and non-Bard healthcare defendants. But the MDL Panel determined that the case shares common factual questions with those already transferred to MDL No. 2846 because the focus of the case is the claim that Bard’s polypropylene hernia mesh products have defects, leading to complications, such as adhesions, organ damage, and infections, when implanted in patients.”

  • Good intentions

    Member
    May 30, 2023 at 8:55 am

    Another update from the Lawsuit Information Center web site. The number is huge and it’s just a single person. And the foundation of the case was built on the material used, so it could be used for suits involving all devices made using that material.

    It’s not polypropylene and it’s not an inguinal hernia repair device but still interesting that juries believe that the damage is real and that Bard bears responsibility.

    I pulled a few of the past reports together. PET is polyethylene terephthalate, called “polyester” in a typical knitted hernia repair mesh. Polypropylene and polyester are the two main materials used in the meshes.

    “May 25, 2023 Update
    The Rhode Island judge in Trevino took $250,000 off the verdict but left $4.55 million intact in post-trial motions. It is hard to understand the logic behind reducing the jury’s award by even a penny after all that plaintiff has been through based on the evidence offered at trial. But in the big picture of things, the judge’s ruling is a win because leaves the lion’s share of the award intact and affirmed the key rulings that Bard had opposed.

    August 29, 2022 Update

    We have a verdict from Rhode Island: $4.8 million. Paul Trevino’s lawsuit alleged that C.R. Bard’s Ventralex hernia patch eroded into his bowel because they chose the materials they used based on price instead of safety. The jury agreed, finding both that the design was defective and that Bard to failed to warn of the risk. I’ve been saying all along I have no idea why Bard let this case go to trial. But the settlement value of Bard hernia mesh cases just went up.

    August 26, 2022 Update
    We could have a Rhode Island state court verdict today in a Bard Ventralex patch case, Trevino v. Bard …. stay tuned.

    In Trevino, the plaintiff claims that the defendants knew or should have known that the PET ring, a component of the Ventralex Mesh, was prone to breaking or buckling, thereby increasing the risk of severe, permanent injuries. Despite these risks, the defendants intended for their product to be implanted for the purposes and in the manner that the plaintiff and her implanting physician used it.”

    Here is the link.

    https://www.lawsuit-information-center.com/bard-hernia-mesh-lawsuits.html

  • Good intentions

    Member
    May 19, 2023 at 10:47 am

    Another update. Of course, the web site is run by a law firm so the hopes expressed are focused on getting that payout. But a person still has to wonder about what happens after that. If Bard (BD) settles it will be only with the clients in the class action suit. The 200+ per month more people appearing each month will still be appearing, eventually, probably, combined to form another one. It looks like a never-ending pipeline. How will they get out of it? J&J has tried to separate various product lines under legal threat, apparently so that they can declare bankruptcy in those separated compnaies and stop the bleeding. But the courts did not allow it.

    None of these products have been removed from the market. There has to be a long-term strategy. What could it be?

    “May 19, 2023 Update
    There was a Case Management Conference in the MDL on Wednesday looking at the progress made in getting the third and fourth bellwether lawsuits (Stinson and Bryan). The next Case Management Conference is scheduled for June 13, 2023. The hope here is that keeping the pressure on Bard in these last two trials will lead to a long-awaited settlement before either of these hernia mesh lawsuits go to trial”

    From earlier in the law firm thread, below. The Perfix plug is still for sale by BD. Dr. Towfigh mentioned that plugs are the highest volume mesh repair product in the world. Maybe that’s the key. Global sales probably dwarf the lawsuit payouts.

    “Stinson, a plaintiffs’ pick for trial, involves the extra-large PerFix Plug device used to repair inguinal hernias. Mr. Stinson claims difficulty with urination, weight gain, an impaired sex life, and nerve entrapment.”

    https://www.bd.com/en-us/products-and-solutions/products/product-families/perfix-plug

  • Good intentions

    Member
    May 16, 2023 at 9:03 pm

    Another update. Somebody has to be doing the math about how many new cases are being produced every day. If nothing is changing in the hernia repair field, and nothing is expected to change in the legal field, then, of course, these lawsuits will continue even after a settlement. It’s very simple logic. Who will end up paying for these payouts?

    “May 15, 2023 Update
    As the hernia mesh class action MDL involving C.R. Bard continues to drag itself towards a conclusion, large numbers of new plaintiffs continue to join. Over the last month, 206 more cases were added to the MDL. That swells the total number of hernia mesh plaintiffs to 19,476. Since the start of the year, 1,000 new cases have been added to the Bard hernia mesh MDL.”

  • Good intentions

    Member
    May 15, 2023 at 8:04 am

    Delay, delay, delay seems to be the current state of the Bard litigation. New motions made by lawyers who know that they will be rejected. Expectations of a settlement were proposed as the reason for the delay to May, now the trial has been delayed to October of 2023. This major healthcare problem has become a purely financial and legal problem. Also interesting that worker’s compensation is handled by a government agency formed to protect workers, but the agency formed to protect the general public is doing nothing.

    “May 13, 2023 Update
    Things have been slow in the hernia mesh litigation while we wait for the Stinson trial and hope for a settlement before that. Yesterday, a new motion was filed in Stinson that revolves around the admissibility of evidence related to Mr. Stinson’s workers’ compensation claim. Bard wants to admit that there was an award and the amount of the award received by Mr. Stinson from his workers’ compensation claim be excluded.

    The plaintiff’s counsel argues that the defendants should be barred from mentioning workers’ compensation during the trial under the collateral source rule. It is hard to imagine a scenario where the plaintiff loses this motion. The whole point of the rule is to referencing a collateral source would risk leading the jury to reduce Mr. Stinson’s damages award, assuming he had already received some compensation. Moreover, workers’ compensation claim holds no evidentiary value.

    May 1, 2023 Update
    The new trial date for Stinson v. C.R. Bard, the third MDL bellwether trial, is now reset for October 16, 2023. This trial date is the pressure point for settlement not only for this case but for the entire litigation.”

  • Good intentions

    Member
    April 4, 2023 at 5:53 pm

    One more. Corporations really don’t care about anything except shareholder value. Their ethos is that anything that makes a profit is good and that if harm is done they will just pay the lawsuit costs.

    https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/johnsonandjohnson-cancer/

    “Facing thousands of lawsuits alleging that its talc caused cancer, J&J insists on the safety and purity of its iconic product. But internal documents examined by Reuters show that the company’s powder was sometimes tainted with carcinogenic asbestos and that J&J kept that information from regulators and the public.”

  • Good intentions

    Member
    April 4, 2023 at 5:37 pm

    Here is an interesting recent article about the topic.

    https://journals.lww.com/epidem/fulltext/2019/11000/talc,_asbestos,_and_epidemiology__corporate.2.aspx

    Talc, Asbestos, and Epidemiology: Corporate Influence and Scientific Incognizance

    Tran, Triet H.a; Steffen, Joan E.a; Clancy, Kate M.a,b; Bird, Tessa,c; Egilman, David S.a,d

    Epidemiology 30(6):p 783-788, November 2019. | DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000001091

    Here is the first paragraph –

    “In the early 1970s, findings of asbestos in talc, and findings of talc colocated in ovarian tumor tissue, led to public controversy.1–5 For over 40 years, talc mining and manufacturing companies attempted to obfuscate the importance of these findings by keeping exposure information behind a corporate veil and otherwise influencing medical information concerning the health effects and asbestos content of talc used in cosmetics.6–9 Control over information is a recognized method by which industries maintain sales and avoid regulation and tort liability.10–16 There are many examples when companies have concealed the presence of hazardous components in products; failed to publish study results indicating that their products presented health risks; and manipulated studies to publish false results that encouraged product use or hid side effects.10–16 For example, in 1971, Henderson et al. found talc in an ovarian cancer tissue sample and raised concerns about the relation between talc use and ovarian cancer.17 Johnson & Johnson hired Arthur Langer, a mineralogist at Mount Sinai, to reexamine the tissue.9,17 Langer confirmed the presence of talc, and also found asbestos in ovarian cancer tissue. Evidence shows that Johnson & Johnson successfully dissuaded him from publishing these findings.9”

  • Good intentions

    Member
    April 4, 2023 at 5:25 pm

    A recent example of the power of the lawsuit. Johnson & Johnson, owners of Ethicon, have stopped selling a product that was making them money because the lawsuits were so strong that it would be too expensive to keep the product. The story of asbestos in talc is long and complex, but it has been in the news for decades.

    They’ve stopped selling the product and they’re trying to minimize their losses with a settlement agreement.

    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/j-j-proposes-paying-8-220350173.html

    “The lawsuits filed against J&J had alleged its talcum powder caused users to develop ovarian cancer, through use for feminine hygiene, or mesothelioma, a cancer that strikes the lungs and other organs.

    The claims contributed to drop in J&J’s sales of baby powder, prompting the company to stop selling its talc-based products in 2020. Last year, J&J announced plans to cease sales of the product worldwide.”

  • Good intentions

    Member
    March 20, 2023 at 10:08 am

    Here are a couple of new updates on the Bard mesh multi-district litigation case. Interesting that they are still describing the latest case as proposing that the polypropylene itself is the cause of the problems. Medtronic just introduced a new Progrip mesh made from polypropylene.

    18,000 cases in the class action. The thought is that Bard will settle this single case, and set the standard for future payouts. It kind of looks like a giant supertanker heading for the rocks. Maybe it will finally drive the mesh producers to invest in research to actually understnad cause and effect nad produce a better product. The profits are too easy with polypropylene and the 510(k) process.

    “March 20, 2023 Update
    As predicted, a settlement appears imminent in Stinson v. C.R. Bard, which was slated to serve as the third test case in the C.R. Bard hernia mesh MDL on May 15, 2023. The trial has been delayed without objection from the plaintiff which is a strong sign of settlement. has been delayed.

    Despite the denial of a summary judgment motion by the defense, allowing the case to move forward, Bard’s defense team requested a postponement, which was granted by the MDL judge two days later. It is unclear when a new trial date will be set. This delay may indicate a possible settlement in the works. We will keep you updated in this space as we learn more.

    March 15, 2023 Update
    The Stinson trial is locked the loaded for May 15th. Plaintiff’s lawyers fought off a motion to dismiss and C.R. Bard and Davol will face most of the claims in a lawsuit filed by a Maine man who alleged that a flawed hernia mesh product caused him pain and other complications.

    The suit is scheduled to be the third – we call it the fourth – bellwether trial in the multidistrict litigation, which has over 18,000 cases pending against the two companies.

    Plaintiff alleges that the polypropylene used in the mesh isn’t suitable for permanent implantation and leads to complications. The judge not only allowed the plaintiff to take his design defect claim to go forward, but he is also allowing the plaintiff to claim punitive damages. The court also cleared negligence and warranty claims for trial but granted judgment for the companies on other claims.”

    https://www.lawsuit-information-center.com/bard-hernia-mesh-lawsuits.html

  • drtowfigh

    Moderator
    February 14, 2023 at 12:06 am

    Great posts on this thread.

    Yup, agree that plug meshes should be off the market and the main reason they aren’t being pulled is because it would look like they are admitting it is a poor design. Also, plug mesh still seems to be among the best sellers, if you can believe it.

    Interestingly, BD is switching to an all Phasix (synthetic absorbable) panel of meshes. And get this: they are making the Perfix plug under the Phasix umbrella too. Unbelievable. They could have easily done away with the plug in their newer generation of products.

  • Good intentions

    Member
    February 13, 2023 at 12:06 pm

    I just posted a video from SAGES 2021 that had at least two plug removal videos contained within it. The next “bellwether” trial for hernia mesh is apparently scheduled to begin in May. It is about the Perfix plug. The process takes so long. After this trial another trial is scheduled for later in the year.

    Still fascinated by the huge dilemma the mesh producers have, considering the scale of the problem. The products are still on the market, maybe because removing them from the market would be admitting that they are flawed. Plugs have been around for decades. There are thousands of potential cases waiting in the future. Johnson and Johnson tried to encapsulate their liability for asbestos/talc by spinning off that part of the business so it could go bankrupt but the courts would not allow it. How do they get out of this mess? When do they start removing bad products and trying to develop products that are actually better?

    Davol was part of Bard, which is now part of Becton Dickinson, known as BD now in the medical field.

    “February 9, 2023 Update
    In an Order issued earlier this week, the Bard MDL judge set forth a detailed schedule for the third hernia mesh bellwether test trial (Stinson v. C.R. Bard et al.). Pretrial conferences will be held on May 2nd and 3rd and the trial itself will begin on May 15, 2023. Final witness lists are due from both sides this month. The judge also requires lawyers for all parties to submit proposed dates for a 4th bellwether trial later in the year.”

  • Good intentions

    Member
    January 30, 2023 at 12:14 pm

    It looks like there was a settlement in the Ethicon Physiomesh case. Ethicon and Johnson & Johnson are essentially the same company.

    The writer of this article brings up the fact that the cases will probably keep coming. The mesh makers have created a lifetime of employment for the law firms. They knew better but they did it anyway. Where is/was the FDA?

    https://www.millerandzois.com/products-liability/hernia-mesh-case-value/kugel-hernia/

    This from almost 9 months ago:

    “May 2, 2022 Update: There is a global settlement in the Ethicon Physiomesh hernia repair lawsuits. There are no settlement numbers that have been released so will know know what your individual settlement amount is.

    The big question is will there be more Ethicon hernia mesh lawsuits in the future? There will still be more henria mesh lawsuits involving Physiomesh because many victims have not yet had complications. There are still many people out there with a recalled mesh inside of them.”

  • William Bryant

    Member
    January 30, 2023 at 11:31 am

    Thanks Good Intentions, it’s so underhand.

    I read on another (Facebook) forum/group that Johnson and Johnson have won every mesh case so far – I can’t see that being true? Does anyone know if it’s true?

Page 1 of 2

Log in to reply.