Resource Center

Free Case Review

Injured by a prescription drug or medical device? you may be entitled to compensation.

Xarelto Uncontrolled Bleeding Alleged in Patient’s Lawsuit

Janssen Research & Development LLC faces a woman’s recent Xarelto uncontrolled bleeding lawsuit alleging severe internal bleeding side effects she claims to have suffered as a direct result of her ingestion of the anticoagulant medication.
Plaintiff Maureen N. filed the Xarelto uncontrolled bleeding lawsuit in Louisiana federal court.
She was also prescribed the medication to treat deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, the Xarelto uncontrolled bleeding lawsuit states.
Maureen alleges that because of her use of Xarelto, however, she suffered injuries including but not limited to hospital, medical, and surgical expenses, physical pain and suffering, and loss of consortium.
Maureen demands a trial by jury.
Maureen’s claim is filed as part of a large MDL centered on allegations that Xarelto’s manufacturers allegedly misrepresented the drug’s safety and insufficiently warned of Xarelto uncontrolled bleeding as a side effect.
Xarelto was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2011.
The drug helps prevent conditions such as pulmonary embolism (PE), deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and blood clots from occurring.
Some symptoms of a DVT include swelling, pain, and tenderness.
Those eligible for legal action may include any person who suffered stroke, death, or serious uncontrolled bleeding side effects from their use of Xarelto.

Device Maker Faces Woman’s Recent Zimmer Biomet Total Hip Replacement Lawsuit

Biomet Inc. faces a woman’s Zimmer Biomet total hip replacement lawsuit filed in Indiana federal court.
Plaintiff Barbara N. joined the MDL filing her claim on Feb. 23, 2018.
According to the Zimmer Biomet total hip replacement lawsuit, Barbara, a resident of the state of New York, says that she was injured due to the “defective medical prosthesis manufactured” by Biomet.
During the procedure, she was implanted with Biomet’s hip implant.
However, according to the Zimmer Biomet total hip replacement lawsuit, soon after the surgical procedure and implantation, Barbara “suffered symptoms including but not limited to increasingly debilitating pain, discomfort, elevated cobalt and chromium levels, and soreness,” the lawsuit states.
The metal-on-metal hip replacement system manufactured by Biomet is the M2A-Magnum Hip system implanted in patients throughout the United States.
Yet patients allege that the manufacturer continued to market the device’s safety and effectiveness.
Patients, however, have reported side effects with the device including dislocation, loosening, and implant failure due to the device’s design.
Adverse side effects associated with the Biomet Magnum hip system include: • Unexplained Tumors • Additional Hip Revision Surgery • Difficulty Standing or Walking • Swelling and Soft Tissue Damage • Unexplained Hip Pain • Loosening of the Hip Implant Plaintiffs allege that the company may have placed their desire for revenue ahead of consumer safety.
The Biomet MDL is In re: Biomet M2a Magnum Hip Implant Products Liability, MDL No.

Long Term Dilantin Patients Wary of Cerebellar Atrophy Symptoms

Long term Dilantin (phenytoin) patients should be wary of cerebellar atrophy symptoms, with several studies and injury reports indicating a correlation.
The first cerebellar atrophy symptoms that typically manifest are moving and speaking difficulties, with studies indicating phenytoin toxicity inflicting damage to the patient’s cerebellum.
Due to the severity of the condition, patients should report cerebellar atrophy symptoms to their doctor as soon as possible to minimize the damage and to maximize treatment options.
If left untreated, cerebellar atrophy can leave patients with limited movement and speech patterns and may increase chances of degenerative conditions like Alzheimer’s disease.
This causes the loss of neurological connections within the brain, resulting in problems in balance, coordination, and speech.
One study was conducted in 1994, initially conducted to analyze how phenytoin affected the brain while preventing seizures.
One of these studies was published in 2003, when researchers noticed cerebellar atrophy was more likely in patients on long term Dilantin prescriptions.
Even though Dilantin cerebellar atrophy can cause major difficulties for patients, the drug maker, patients may not have been adequately warned about this problem.
Dilantin patients who develop cerebellar atrophy could be eligible for legal action, and might be able to seek damages for negligence and failure to warn.
The attorneys who work with Top Class Actions will contact you if you qualify to let you know if an individual Dilantin lawsuit or Dilantin class action lawsuit is best for you.

Plaintiff Alleges Physiomesh Hernia Mesh Surgery Caused Serious Injury

A new hernia mesh surgery lawsuit was filed in a federal court in Atlanta on Feb. 27, 2018.
The plaintiffs are Earl C. and Cindy C., a married couple who are citizens and residents of the state of Arizona.
2782, In re: Ethicon Physiomesh Flexible Composite Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation.
The hernia mesh surgery was done at Banner Del E. Webb Medical Center in Sun City West, Ariz. by Dr. James Cooper M.D.
Ethicon Physiomesh is uniquely designed with five layers—four of which sandwich the first polypropylene mesh layer.
The defendants advertised this makeup as designed to decrease to chances of developing adhesions once placed within the body in a hernia mesh surgery.
Patients implanted with this medical device have experienced migration of the mesh within the abdominal cavity and damage to nerves and tissues including tissue death.
The couple is asking for a trial by jury with a favorable decision on their behalf according to evidence provided.
They ask for a review of mental and physical pain associated with alleged mesh injury as well as economic setbacks such as cost of past, present and ongoing medical treatment and loss of income and earning potential.
The Hernia Mesh Surgery Lawsuit is Case No.

Stryker LFIT V40 Failure Prompts New Lawsuit

Plaintiff Katherina M. says she was implanted with the Stryker LFIT V40 hip replacement device in June 2010.
She is claiming that because of a Stryker LFIT V40 failure and the explantation surgery, she has suffered injury to herself and economic loss.
Katherina claims that she “could not have known that the injuries she suffered were as a result of a defect in the Device at issue until after the date the Device was recalled from the market and the Plaintiff came to learn of the recall.” She also alleges that she “could not have known that she was injured by excessive levels of chromium and cobalt until after the date she had her blood drawn and she was advised of the results of said blood-work and the fact that those blood work abnormalities” were most likely caused by a defect in her Stryker LFIT V40 device.
She is bringing forth claims of negligence, negligence per se, strict products liability, manufacturing defect, failure to warn, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranties, and negligent misrepresentation, among others.
Stryker LFIT V40 Failure Many patients, including patients like Katherina, have experienced Stryker LFIT V40 failure.
As a result, many have filed hip implant lawsuits against the device manufacturer.
Problems with the Stryker LFIT V40 devices have been linked to their femoral heads.
Femoral heads are the part of the hip implant system that lies at the top of the leg bone, the femur.
Stryker issued a recall for their femoral heads because of reports of disassociation of the femoral head, fracture, excessive metal debris, insufficient soft tissue tension, noise and excessive wear debris.
Reports have also indicated that some patients experience the shedding of metal debris into surrounding tissue.

Intracranial Mirena IUD Hypertension Injuries Spark New Lawsuit

A plaintiff who says she experienced intracranial Mirena IUD hypertension injuries filed a new lawsuit along with her spouse in federal court in New York.
Plaintiffs Kaitlin S. and her husband David S. are residents of Morrilton, Ark.
2767, In re: Mirena IUD Levonorgestrel-related Products Liability Litigation, which is now in progress in federal court.
The Mirena IUD is a contraceptive device designed to prevent pregnancy for up to five years from the date of insertion by releasing a daily 20 mg. dose of levonorgestrel.
The Mirena IUD new drug application (NDA) was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in December 2009.
Its ‘on-label’ use was specifically for contraception, but in 2009, according to the lawsuit’s documentation, it was additionally approved to help women troubled with excessive menstrual flow who also sought to prevent pregnancy.
Plaintiff Kaitlin S. is 27 years old and was implanted with the Mirena IUD in August 2009.
Moreover, Kaitlin was provided with a patient information booklet by her doctor.
She claims it wasn’t until March 2013 that she was relieved of some of the Mirena IUD complications when the device spontaneously expelled itself from her uterus.
The Mirena IUD Hypertension Lawsuit is Case No.

Dozens File Essure Birth Control Device Lawsuit Over Major Side Effects

A group of seventy patients implanted with Essure have come together to file an Essure birth control device lawsuit, alleging they were affected by serious side effects of the device.
According to the Essure birth control device lawsuit, these plaintiffs were each implanted with an Essure birth control device.
Indeed, the plaintiffs allege that Bayer Healthcare, the device manufacturer, failed to follow requirements for reporting issues, failed to inform the FDA of known hazards, and failed to comply with federal marketing and distribution laws regarding the safety of devices.
The plaintiffs filed their lawsuit on Feb. 23, 2018, and it joins the growing pile of Essure litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
In an outpatient procedure, the metal coils are placed in the fallopian tubes.
If you or someone you love has suffered from complications after implantation with Essure, you may be able to file an Essure birth control device lawsuit against Bayer.
The Essure Birth Control Device Lawsuit is Case No.
In general, Essure lawsuits are filed individually by each plaintiff and are not class actions.
Do YOU have a legal claim?
Hurry — statutes of limitations may apply.

Levaquin Side Effects May Include Aortic Aneurysm, Aortic Dissection

Research has shown that Levaquin side effects may include an increased risk of aortic aneurysm and aortic dissection.
Levaquin is one of type of antibiotics called fluoroquinolones.
Fluoroquinolones are broad-spectrum antibiotics commonly used to treat bacterial infections, especially respiratory infections and urinary tract infections.
Other uses for fluoroquinolones include the treatment of bacterial bronchitis, pneumonia, sinusitis, typhoid fever, pelvic inflammatory disease, and more.
A nested, case-control analysis of data from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) has shown that use of fluoroquinolones, including Levaquin, may increase the risk of aortic aneurysm or dissection.
Use of these antibiotics for two months to a year prior to hospitalization also appeared to be associated with severe aortic events, although the risk was lower than the risk within 60 days of exposure.
“Use of fluoroquinolones was associated with an increased risk of aortic aneurysm and dissection.
The aorta serves as the body’s main artery that carries blood out of the heart.
This weakens the aortic wall and can lead to an aortic dissection.
When the inner layer of the aorta tears, it allows blood to enter the aortic wall and separate the inner and middle layers of the aorta.

FDA’s Strategic Policy Roadmap – Part 2 Addressing Addiction

And in addition to mortality there are the lives touched by these deaths, splintering relationships and families, incurring enormous personal and financial cost.
During his confirmation hearings, the opioid issue was a primary concern expressed among policy makers and Commissioner Gottlieb provided reassurance that it for him a top priority.
The Strategic Policy Roadmap released by FDA in January has as its first stated area of concentration to reduce the burden of addiction crises.
The Roadmap begins by addressing opioids but also addresses nicotine related goals.
In the February 12 Federal Register, FDA published a notice that it was not approving an instant release opioid formulation that lacked deterrent properties.
Part of the Roadmap references the role that stigma might play in reducing access to therapy.
This signals possible plans to address the issue through a formalized education effort, perhaps in conjunction with other federal agencies.
Addressing Nicotine Addiction in Combustible Cigarettes Here the Roadmap states that FDA is developing a comprehensive approach to regulating nicotine by regulating nicotine levels to make smoking less addictive.
Helping More Smokers Quit and Stay Quit The plan states that FDA will take a fresh look at products that can deliver nicotine without burning tobacco.
Senators urging FDA not to approve the products in question.

Risperdal Plaintiffs Get OK to Seek Punitive Damages

Because of the ruling by the three-judge Superior Court panel on Jan. 8, plaintiffs in the Philadelphia cases may apply the law of their home state to seek punitive damages.
A J&J spokesperson told the Intelligencer that the company was “disappointed in the ruling” and would consider its options moving forward.
“The stakes in any mass tort are raised when punitive damages are recoverable,” lead attorney in the litigation Thomas R. Kline told the Legal Intelligencer.
Because of the threat of punitive damages, plaintiffs’ attorneys are hopeful J&J will consider settling the remaining cases.
Judge: J&J Sought to Benefit from ‘Concealment’ of Risks The appeal to allow plaintiffs to use the law of their home state for punitive damages began in Stange v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals.
Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Kenneth J. Powell Jr.’s 2016 ruling in the Stange case upheld the jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff and may have helped pave the way for the punitive damages appeal.
Powell said J&J “hid evidence of the association between Risperdal use and elevated prolactin levels.” Prolactin is a chemical in the body that causes breast growth.
“The defendants themselves are to blame for the fact that the plaintiff’s prolactin levels were not carefully monitored during the period in which he was prescribed Risperdal.
A jury awarded him $500,000, but Stange could not seek punitive damages because of the New Jersey law.
Because of the recent Superior Court ruling, he may apply the law of his home state of Wisconsin to seek punitive damages in a new trial.