Parker Waichman LLP

Federal Appeals Court Rejects C.R. Bard’s Argument about Transvaginal Mesh Device Safety

In a ruling on January 14, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the first jury verdict in multidistrict litigation involving more than 70,000 cases against the makers of transvaginal mesh medical devices. The court upheld the jury award of $250,000 in compensatory damages and $1,750,000 in punitive damages to a […]

Federal-Appeals-CourtIn a ruling on January 14, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the first jury verdict in multidistrict litigation involving more than 70,000 cases against the makers of transvaginal mesh medical devices.

The court upheld the jury award of $250,000 in compensatory damages and $1,750,000 in punitive damages to a woman and her husband in a case against device manufacturer C.R. Bard Inc., the Legal Examiner reports.

The case involved a transvaginal mesh device, used to treat pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in women. Such devices are designed to be implanted to treat POP and stress urinary incontinence (SUI), but many women experience serious complications and are left in chronic pain, facing worse problems than those the surgery was intended to remedy.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says the most common side effects associated with transvaginal mesh devices include:

  • mesh erosion through the vagina (also called exposure, extrusion, or protrusion)
  • pain
  • infection
  • bleeding
  • pain during sexual intercourse
  • organ perforation
  • urinary problems

Some women have needed additional surgery to remove the mesh and repair organ damage. These surgeries are not always successful.

The Fourth Circuit’s January 14, 2016 decision is important to the women who have brought suits because the Court rejected one of C.R. Bard’s key arguments, the Legal Examiner explains. Bard said that because it had submitted the device under the FDA’s 510(k) medical device clearance process, the transvaginal mesh device was necessarily “safe.” Bard argued that it should have been allowed to say that to the jury.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other groups filed briefs in support of Bard. They argued that “evidence of § 510(k) clearance is relevant under Georgia law and easily passes muster under Federal Rule of Evidence 401, as it bears on the safety, efficacy, and reasonableness of the product’s design.” They further argued that “the District Court erred in concluding that the § 510(k) process is not concerned with the device’s safety or effectiveness.” The appeals court rejected these arguments.

The Legal Examiner explains that the argument was wrong because the 510(k) process does not actually establish that a product is safe or effective. Clearance merely establishes that the device is “substantially equivalent” to another device on the market. The process does not evaluate a product’s safety.

The Fourth Circuit noted that “hile some courts have found evidence of compliance with the 510(k) equivalence procedure admissible in product liability cases, the clear weight of persuasive and controlling authority favors a finding that the 510(k) procedure is of little or no evidentiary value.”

The FDA has proposed a reclassification of transvaginal mesh devices from Class II to Class III. This would mean that pelvic mesh devices used for POP repair would no longer be able to receive clearance through the 510(k) approval process. Manufacturers would be required to conduct clinical trials to prove that the devices are safe and effective.

 

 

What Our Clients Say About Us
We have worked with thousands of clients and we appreciate them and their positive reviews. Here are just a few recent client reviews...
5 Star Reviews 150
Parker Waichman are the best. They are always there for you. Theh really care about you. Thank you Jorge peniche and Linda Ingber for helping me
Ramon Mella
4 years ago
5 Star Reviews 150
Tina Morace was instrumental in my effort to receive the maxium compensation for my WTC claim. I can only express my deepest appreciation for her professional guidance and constant support ! She is truly an asset to the firm.
Thomas Larner
a year ago
5 Star Reviews 150
Parker Waichman was extremely professional and helpful in handling our WTC case. Benita Rollis, in particular, was amazing in helping us complete all the necessary steps and paper work for our claim. She was always quick to return phone calls and reach out to keep us posted on how things were progressing. Not only was Benita efficient and professional, she was also very compassionate in helping us through the emotional side of this long process. Carolyn Corcoran & Family
Robert Harris
a year ago

Why Choose Us to Help You?

We Take Care of Everything
Your situation is stressful enough: Let us take on the deadlines, paperwork, investigation, and litigation. We'll handle every detail so you don't have to worry.
No Recovery = No Legal Fees
We work on a contingency-fee basis, meaning that we only get paid from a portion of your settlement or jury award. If you don't get compensation, you owe us nothing.
Decades of Experience
Your situation is stressful enough: Let us take on the deadlines, paperwork, investigation, and litigation. We'll handle every detail so you don't have to worry.
Respected by Our Peers
Judges, insurance adjusters, and fellow attorneys all speak highly of our skills, and we've earned numerous accolades, including a flawless rating from AVVO.
We Have Many Locations To Serve You
We have the experience and the skilled litigators to win your case. Contact us and speak with a real attorney who can help you.
Long Island – Nassau
Parker Waichman LLP
6 Harbor Park Drive
Port Washington, NY 11050
Long Island – Suffolk
Parker Waichman LLP
201 Old Country Road – Suite 145
Melville, NY 11747
New York
Parker Waichman LLP
59 Maiden Lane, 6th Floor
New York, NY 10038
Queens
Parker Waichman LLP
118-35 Queens Boulevard, Suite 400
Forest Hills, NY 11375
Brooklyn
Parker Waichman LLP
300 Cadman Plaza West
One Pierrepont Plaza, 12th Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11201
New Jersey
Parker Waichman LLP
80 Main Street, Suite 265
West Orange, NJ 07052
Florida
Parker Waichman LLP
27299 Riverview Center Boulevard
Suite 108
Bonita Springs, FL 34134
Nationwide Service
Parker Waichman LLP
59 Maiden Lane, 6th Floor
New York, NY 10038