Tag

Bloomberg News Archives - Carey Danis & Lowe

First Actos Trial in California Uncovers Takeda’s Deceptive Actos Marketing Tactics

By | Actos, Pharmaceutical litigation, Uncategorized

First Actos Trial in California Uncovers Takeda's Deceptive Actos Marketing TacticsIn 2003, Takeda Pharmaceuticals Inc. expressed concerns about whether Actos users could develop cancer. These reservations on the part of the Japanese pharmaceutical company came to light in court documents filed in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles.

The internal documents reveal that Takeda Pharmaceuticals went so far as to survey doctors about whether a diabetes drug with a label warning about the risk of developing bladder cancer would prevent them from writing a prescription for the drug. After reviewing responses, Takeda Pharmaceuticals concluded that a bladder cancer warning on the Actos label would have a debilitating impact on Actos sales.

Undertaking such a measure is a clear illustration of Takeda Pharmaceuticals’ market-driven philosophy wherein profits far surpass consumer safety in matters of importance.

These internal Takeda documents were filed in the first Actos lawsuit to go to trial. The case is Cooper v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc. According to a Bloomberg News report on the Actos trial, there are currently 3,000 Actos lawsuits pending across the country.

These Actos lawsuits including Takeda losing its Actos patent last year are certain to factor in to the company’s reliance on the diabetes drug to be a big moneymaker in 2013. In March 2011, Bloomberg recorded that Actos comprised 27 percent of Takeda’s revenue. Though, this high revenue trend will likely change as Actos has developed a tarnished reputation due to its link to bladder cancer.

In another revealing court filing, Takeda relayed special instructions to its U.S. sales representatives. Essentially, the internal document stated that if safety concerns are not raised, then do not reveal anything about the risk of bladder cancer, and instead, focus on selling the drug.

In response to these documents, a Takeda representative has stated that these documents have been taken out of context.

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe have been paying close attention to the court proceedings in this first Actos lawsuit to go to trial. For those who have been injured by Actos, and especially Actos users who have developed Actos bladder cancer, Carey Danis & Lowe is currently accepting Actos claims, and offering free legal evaluations.

For more information about filing an Actos lawsuit, contact an experienced defective drug lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe today by calling 800.721.2519 or by submitting a legal claim form

First Actos Trial is Cooper v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc.

By | Actos, Pharmaceutical litigation, Uncategorized

First Actos Trial is Cooper v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc.The first Actos lawsuit has gone to trial in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles, known as Cooper v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals America Inc. Cooper v. Takeda is being heard by Judge Kenneth Freeman in California. The plaintiff in the case claims that Takeda failed to warn that one of the risks connected to the diabetes drug is bladder cancer.

To date, there are over 3,000 Actos bladder cancer lawsuits that have been filed against Takeda across the United States in states like California, Illinois, and Louisiana.

In Louisiana, approximately 1,200 Actos lawsuits have been consolidated into a multi-district litigation (MDL). Actos MDL court documents show that the first Actos MDL trial is scheduled for November 2014.

In a report from Bloomberg News, a Takeda representative has publicly stated that the pharmaceutical company has acted appropriately in its response to reports of patients developing bladder cancer linked to Actos ingestion.

However, a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) analyses of a ten year study conducted by Takeda Pharmaceuticals and Kaiser Permanente Northern California illustrates “increased risk of bladder cancer among patients with the longest exposure to Actos”. Furthermore, the FDA also cited an increased risk of developing bladder cancer in those individuals who ingest high doses of Actos.

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe encourage individuals who have been injured by Actos to contact the law firm for a free legal evaluation and to file an Actos lawsuit. Carey Danis & Lowe believes that it is important to protect consumers and hold negligent pharmaceutical companies, like Takeda, responsible for releasing a harmful drug onto the market.

Contact an experienced trial lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe by calling 800.721.2519 or by filling out the Carey Danis & Lowe legal claims form.

Closing Arguments Delivered in Gynecare Prolift Trial in New Jersey

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

Closing Arguments Delivered in Gynecare Prolift Trial in New JerseyA decision by the jury should be delivered soon regarding a lawsuit filed in New Jersey against Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon, the developer and manufacturer of the Gynecare Prolift vaginal mesh product. Late last week, both sides shared their closing arguments, which leaves the jury to deliberate on the testimony presented before them since the start of the trial on January 10, 2013.

The case is Gross v. Gynecare Inc., and is being heard in a SuperiorCourtofAtlanticCounty in Atlantic City, New Jersey by Judge Carol Higbee. The plaintiff is a former nurse from South Dakota, Linda Gross. According to a Bloomberg News report, Gross’s lawsuit is the first Gynecare Prolift lawsuit to go to trial out of 1,800.

Gross filed the Gynecare Prolift lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson alleging that the pharmaceutical company neglected to disclose the health risks connected to use of their vaginal mesh product. Furthermore, in closing statements, the plaintiff’s lawyer stated that Ethicon was fully knowledgeable of the health risks linked to implantation of the Gynecare Prolift vaginal mesh, but ignored those risks in marketing the vaginal mesh product.

Health complications linked to the implantation of vaginal mesh like Johnson & Johnson’s Gynecare Prolift include the following:

  • severe pelvic pain
  • bleeding
  • infections
  • vaginal mesh exposure
  • vaginal mesh erosion
  • vaginal mesh hardening causing tissue scarring
  • several surgical procedures to remove the mesh

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe are closely monitoring the Gynecare Prolift trial in New Jersey, and are currently evaluating Gynecare Prolift cases. The law firm of Carey Danis & Lowe seeks justice for our clients who have been made the victims of negligent pharmaceutical giants.

If you or someone you love has been injured by the Johnson & Johnson Gynecare Prolift vaginal mesh, you may be eligible to receive compensation for your suffering, losses, medical expenses, and more. Contact an experienced trial lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe for a free legal evaluation and to file a Gynecare Prolift lawsuit by calling 800.721.2519 or by filling out our legal claims form.

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe Currently Evaluating Mirena Cases

By | Mirena, Pharmaceutical litigation, Uncategorized

Published February 20, 2013 by PR Web

St. Louis, Missouri (PRWEB) February 20, 2013

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe Currently Evaluating Mirena CasesTo address the increasing number of adverse event reports associated with the use of the Mirena intrauterine device manufactured by Bayer(1), lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe have launched a new website with useful information for individuals who may have used the Mirena IUD or know someone who has used the contraceptive device.

The new webpage has information about health complications associated with use of Bayer’s Mirena IUD. In Carey Danis & Lowe’s investigation into patients who have used the Mirena IUD, the most common health complications linked to use of the contraceptive device are the IUD embedding into the uterine wall, IUD tissue perforation, and ectopic pregnancy.(2)

The information provided on the Mirena IUD website is intended to assist patients who have used the IUD and individuals who know someone who has used the contraceptive device with understanding the IUD’s health complications and exploring legal options offered by Carey Danis & Lowe.

In addition to launching a new Mirena IUD webpage, lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe are closely watching a lawsuit filed against Bayer in a Pennsylvania federal court.

According to a Bloomberg News report,(3) a new Mirena IUD lawsuit has been filed against Bayer in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. The plaintiff who filed the lawsuit alleges that Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc. failed to supply information and warn the public and healthcare providers about the health problems associated with use of the Mirena IUD, including the device embedding into surrounding tissue and ectopic pregnancy among others.

The plaintiff in the case known as Prendergast v. Bayer Pharmaceuticals Corp. is a Pennsylvania women who received a Mirena IUD, and subsequently had surgery to remove the contraceptive device after experiencing serious complications.(3) Among her other claims in the lawsuit, Ms. Prendergast alleges that the German pharmaceutical company employed misleading and deceptive marketing to advertise the Mirena IUD as a safe medical device.

In response to the Pennsylvania Mirena IUD lawsuit, a Bayer spokesperson said that the pharmaceutical company “will vigorously defend itself against claims regarding Mirena”, according to Bloomberg News.

The Pennsylvania Mirena IUD lawsuit is not the first circumstance wherein Bayer’s Mirena marketing campaign has fallen under scrutiny for its deceptive strategies. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2009 wrote a letter to a Bayer executive that pointed to unsubstantiated marketing language that claimed Mirena would improve happiness, health, and one’s romantic life.(4)

In its letter, the FDA stated that no such evidence existed linking Mirena to health improvements, and in fact, they had evidence that demonstrated the opposite, that Mirena use led to a decline in health due to certain side effects. As a result of outrageous claims supported by no evidence of any kind, the FDA ruled that Bayer’s Mirena marketing strategy violated the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

To learn more about the serious health risks linked to use of Bayer’s Mirena IUD, the Mirena deceptive advertising campaign, and legal options for those who have used the Mirena IUD, contact a lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe, or visit the new Mirena IUD webpage.

Resources:
(1)http://www.adverseevents.com/drugdetail.php?AEDrugID=3893&BrandName=MIRENA

(2)http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-28/bayer-sued-over-alleged-hidden-risks-of-mirena-contraceptive-1-.html

Carey Danis & Lowe is a plaintiff’s litigation firm based in St. Louis, Missouri with law offices across the United States in Illinois, Missouri, and Florida. Carey Danis & Lowe specializes in defective drug and pharmaceutical litigation and class action lawsuits. The Carey Danis & Lowe team is comprised of experienced attorneys working alongside knowledgeable professional staff that includes medical doctors, nurses, and information technology specialists. Contact Carey Danis & Lowe at 800-721-2519.

DePuy ASR Hip Trial Update: DePuy Marketing Director Voiced Concerns about DePuy ASR Hip Implant and Advised Recall

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

DePuy ASR Hip Trial Update: DePuy Marketing Director Voiced Concerns about DePuy ASR Hip Implant and Advised RecallThe first of 10,000 DePuy ASR Hip lawsuits is on trial in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles County. The trial, Kransky v. DePuy, continues to move forward with testimony, most recently from a DePuy marketing executive.

he testimony delivered late last week concerned a Johnson & Johnson director of hip marketing, Paul Berman, who wrote an email voicing concerns about the safety of the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system, and advised a recall. Berman’s email was sent out on March 14, 2010.

According to a Bloomberg News report on the most recent DePuy ASR Hip trial proceedings, a total of four emails were sent out to other Johnson & Johnson and DePuy executives addressing Berman’s misgivings about the DePuy ASR Hip implant. Furthermore, Randall Kilburn, a DePuy marketing executive, testified that he showed Berman’s email to the then DePuy president, David Floyd.

Clearly, then, DePuy executives at all levels were made aware of at least one employee’s concerns regarding the safety of the DePuy ASR Hip implant. However, the DePuy ASR Hip recall took place several months after Berman’s email was sent out in March 2010. It appears that these early warning signs and concerns were ignored for far too long, allowing time for more patients to receive defective hip implants.

The DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system has become synonymous with an abnormally high failure rate. According to information supplied to the jury in Kransky v. DePuy, evidence revealed the failure rate for the DePuy ASR Hip implant to be “35.8 percent within 4.57 years”.

This failure rate calculation comes from an internal DePuy study conducted to determine the efficacy of the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system.

In a recent New York Times article, it appears that Johnson & Johnson also received a letter from a doctor and consultant addressing the defective design of the DePuy ASR Hip implant that, according to his observations, was causing harm to patients. The letter was sent in 2008, and advised that Johnson & Johnson “slow its marketing” in order to conduct an in-depth study of the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system.

Evidently, Johnson & Johnson chose to ignore the warning signs and letters coming internally and from outside of the company about the defective nature of the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system.

If you or someone you love has received a DePuy ASR Hip implant, and has experienced any health complications related to the implant, such as metal poisoning, neurological damage, numerous revision surgeries, and local tissue, muscle, and bone damage, you may be eligible to receive compensation for such undue suffering and loss.

For a free legal consultation and to file a DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit, contact an experienced trial lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe by calling 800.721.2519 or by submitting a claim using our legal claims form.

Biomedical Engineer Delivers Testimony in California DePuy ASR Hip Trial: Hip Implant Designed with Life-Threatening Defects

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

Biomedical Engineer Delivers Testimony in California DePuy ASR Hip Trial: Hip Implant Designed with Life-Threatening DefectsTestimony in the DePuy ASR Hip trial in California continues to shed light on the defective quality of Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system. A biomedical engineer and McGill University professor served as an expert witness for the plaintiff, Loren Kransky, in the first DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit to go to trial. Kransky v. DePuy is being heard in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles County.

According to a Bloomberg News report, the biomedical engineer, Dennis Bobyn, stated that he believed the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system was designed by Johnson & Johnson with several design flaws that caused an abnormally high rate of failure.

One of these DePuy ASR Hip implant defects involves the metal components, specifically the metal cup and the metal ball, that slide against one another causing a release of metal debris, which then enters the bloodstream and damages local tissues, bones, and muscles.

Metallosis, or metal poisoning, is a major health complication associated with the implantation of the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system.

In their defense, lawyers for Johnson & Johnson are attempting to build an argument that Kransky’s health complications are unrelated to any defects with Kransky’s DePuy ASR Hip Replacement.

As detailed in a Bloomberg News report dating from February 8, the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system has a recorded rate of failure in the United Kingdom of 12 percent in five years. An even high failure rate has been recorded in Australia at 40 percent.

In light of the DePuy ASR Hip implant’s abnormally high failure rates, Johnson & Johnson’s defense appears to be flimsy and inadequate.

The defective medical device lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe are keeping a watchful eye on the court proceedings of Kransky v. DePuy. Furthermore, Carey Danis & Lowe is currently providing free legal consultations regarding DePuy ASR Hip cases. Contact Carey Danis & Lowe for a free legal evaluation and to file a DePuy ASR Hip Replacement lawsuit by calling 800.721.2519. 

Takeda Pharmaceuticals Releases New Diabetes Drug with Bladder Cancer Causing Pioglitazone

By | Actos, Pharmaceutical litigation, Uncategorized

takeda_pharmaceuticals_actos_bladder_cancer_new_diabetes_drug_combination_alogliptinThe manufacturer of the diabetes drug Actos, a drug that is tied up in mounting complaints and lawsuits citing the development of bladder cancer, has received U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for a new diabetes drug known generically as alogliptin. The FDA approved three new alogliptin combination drugs for the treatment of type 2 diabetes along with an adjusted diet and exercise regimen.

Takeda has announced that it will release the three drug combinations onto the market beginning in the summer of 2013.

Takeda Pharmaceuticals, a Japanese pharmaceutical company, lost their patent over Actos, known generically as pioglitazone, back in August 2012. With more competition entering into the diabetes drug market, especially with generic versions of Actos, Takeda Pharmaceuticals has introduced three combinations of alogliptin, one of which includes pioglitazone, which is present in Actos.

The alogliptin and pioglitazone drug combination is known as Oseni.

A major concern with the release of Oseni is that, though it will be marketed as a separate drug from Actos, it still contains the same active ingredient present in Actos, known as pioglitazone, a notorious ingredient that has been linked to the development of bladder cancer.

As of yet, however, the only warning given for Oseni is that of congestive heart failure, which is similar to the safety alert the FDA released in August 2007 about Actos and congestive heart failure.

Though it may not be immediately apparent that Oseni proves to be just as harmful as Actos, it is easy to make such a deduction following the mountain of complaints and lawsuits that have sprouted up across the country pertaining to the development of bladder cancer. In light of this, it is egregious that Takeda Pharmaceuticals would release onto the market yet another drug containing an ingredient suspected of causing bladder cancer.

One possible motivation for Takeda’s lack of sensitivity to the harm caused by Actos and pioglitazone is the pharmaceutical giant’s efforts to increase profits. According to a Wall Street Journal article published in early February, Takeda has taken a huge hit in the marketplace with their profits dropping 14 percent. Furthermore, a Bloomberg News report cites that Takeda is anticipating a significantly lower net income through early 2015.

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe are currently evaluating Actos bladder cancer cases. We are also closely monitoring Actos lawsuits being filed around the country. If you or someone you love has been injured by Actos, you and your loved one may be eligible to receive compensation.

For a free legal evaluation about your Actos case, contact an experienced trial lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe at 800.721.2519.

Actos MDL No. 2299 Convened for Status Conference in U.S. District Court in Louisiana

By | Actos, Pharmaceutical litigation, Uncategorized

Actos MDL No. 2299 Convened for Status Conference in U.S. District Court in LouisianaParties involved in the Actos multi-district litigation (MDL) in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana met for a Status Conference on January 24, 2013. The MDL is known as in re: Actos (Pioglitazone Products Liability Litigation) MDL No. 11-md-2299, and is being presided over by U.S. District Judge Rebecca F. Doherty.

During the most recent Actos MDL Status Conference, the court reviewed recent Actos filings in federal and state courts as well as any new developments since the Actos MDL’s last Status Conference in December 2012. According to an Actos MDL court document, the parties also discussed the progress of the discovery phase. The next Status Conference is scheduled for February 21, 2013.

Plaintiffs whose cases have been consolidated into the Actos MDL have filed their lawsuits against the manufacturer of Actos claiming that the drug caused serious health complications, including bladder cancer.

In a study conducted by Takeda Pharmaceuticals in collaboration with Kaiser Permanente, data shows an increased risk in the development of bladder cancer in patients who have been using Actos for more than 1 year. At this time, the FDA is reviewing information from the Takeda and Kaiser Permanente ten year study. In Europe, healthcare officials have banned sales of Actos following data released from a French epidemiological study that showed a strong link between the ingestion of Actos and the development of bladder cancer.

In other Actos related news, the manufacturer of Actos has received approval to sell a new diabetes drug in the U.S. According to a Bloomberg News report, the Japanese manufacturer of Actos, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, just received approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for a new diabetes medication known generically as alogliptin. Takeda Pharmaceuticals intends to market alogliptin in the U.S. by the brand name of Nesina.

Over a five year period, the FDA rejected the new diabetes medication twice before finally granting it approval this month. Whether this new diabetes drug comes with the risk of developing bladder cancer is still uncertain.

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe are currently evaluating Actos claims. If you or someone you love has taken Actos and has subsequently developed bladder cancer, you may be eligible to receive recompense for your pain, suffering, medical expenses, and lost wages.

For a free legal evaluation about your Actos claim and to learn more about filing an Actos bladder cancer lawsuit, contact an experienced trial lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe at 800.721.2519 today.

First DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Lawsuit Goes to Trial in Los Angeles Superior Court

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

First DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Lawsuit Goes to Trial in Los Angeles Superior CourtThe first in 10,000 DePuy ASR Hip Replacement lawsuits went to trial in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles County on January 25. The case is Kransky v. DePuy. The plaintiff, Loren Kransky, is a North Dakota resident who received a DePuy ASR Hip Replacement, and filed the lawsuit claiming a defective design and manufacturer negligence.

According to an article recently published by the New York Times, Johnson & Johnson was aware of a serious design flaw in the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement. However, internal Johnson & Johnson documents, which were unsealed during trial proceedings on January 25, reveal that company executives intentionally withheld information about the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement design flaw from healthcare providers and the public.

In a Bloomberg News report of the Los Angeles Superior Court DePuy ASR trial, testimony given by a biomedical engineer and consultant, George Samaras, indicated that DePuy researchers recorded extremely high levels of chromium and cobalt metal ions in the body, in fact a concentration 16 times higher in comparison to another of DePuy’s medical devices.

DePuy is a unit of Johnson & Johnson that developed and manufactured the ASR, or Articular Surface Replacement, hip implant. In addition, Samaras shared with the jury that DePuy and Johnson & Johnson claimed that the ASR Hip Replacement passed internal medical device standards, when in fact, it had failed them.

Johnson & Johnson recalled the DePuy ASR Hip implant in 2010. The reason given for recalling the hip implant had nothing to do with defective design, but rather, long-term market viability.

In these same internal document unsealed during the Los Angeles DePuy ASR trial, researchers at DePuy noted an abnormally high failure rate for the ASR Hip Replacement, that of 40 percent within only five years after receiving the DePuy hip implant. With this information, Johnson & Johnson still marketed the defective and flawed medical device to healthcare providers and the public.

Furthermore, DePuy and Johnson & Johnson were not only receiving warning signs from internal reports. According to the New York Times report, doctors were reporting complications and device failures regarding the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement to Johnson & Johnson just as the medical device manufacturer was beginning to market the device in the U.S. In 2005.

Thus, with information coming from within and from healthcare professionals, Johnson & Johnson proceeded with their efforts to sell the defective DePuy ASR Hip Replacement.

Patients who have received an implant of the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement note high levels of metal ions in the blood, resulting in metallosis, or metal poisoning. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has released safety communications about tissue and bone damage as well as neurological impairment resulting from metal debris created by metal-on-metal hip implants, such as the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement.

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe are closely examining DePuy ASR Hip Replacement lawsuits across the country. If you or someone you love has received an implant of the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement, contact a lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe for a free legal evaluation about your case.

You may be eligible to receive compensation for your medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering. Learn more about filing a DePuy ASR Hip Replacement lawsuit by calling a lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe at 800.721.2519.

First Trials for Defective DePuy ASR Hip Replacement System Set for January 2013

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

First Trials for Defective DePuy ASR Hip Replacement System Set for January 2013A state case regarding the recalled DePuy ASR hip replacement system is scheduled to go to trial in January 2013 in Prince George’s County, Maryland. If DePuy does not settle with plaintiffs before trials begin, the Maryland court will hear three cases regarding health complications related to DePuy’s ASR hip implants.

In August 2012, DePuy, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, settled state cases in Nevada regarding defective ASR hip replacement lawsuits. Trials for these ASR hip replacement cases filed against DePuy were scheduled to begin in December 2012, but due to the settlement, trial dates have since been canceled. The individuals in each Nevada case received $200,000 each, according to a Bloomberg News report.

In 2010, due to what they claimed to be poor sales as opposed to the escalating reports of ASR hip replacement failures, Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy initiated a worldwide recall of 93,000 ASR hip replacement systems. Ultimately, DePuy admitted that the recall was the result of the high ASR hip replacement failure rate.

Individuals who have filed lawsuits against DePuy have claimed that DePuy’s defective ASR hip replacement system resulted in numerous painful revision surgeries, severe pain, dislocated joints, joint malfunction and dislocation, infection, bone fractures, and metallosis. Plaintiffs claim that the unique design of the ASR hip replacement, being a metal-on-metal total hip replacement, led to an accumulation of metal flakes inside of the body.

6,000 DePuy ASR hip replacement lawsuits have been consolidated into a Multi-District Litigation based in Toledo, Ohio overseen by U.S. District Judge David A. Katz. There are another 2,000 cases filed against Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy in states across the U.S., including those in Nevada, Maryland, California, Wisconsin, Florida, and Utah.

The MDL No. 2197 based in Ohio is due to convene for a Status Conference in January 2013, during which time the court will most likely detail preparations for the first bellwether trials scheduled to begin in May 2013.

To file a DePuy ASR hip replacement lawsuit, contact an experienced defective medical device lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe.