Judge Denies Motion of Summary Judgment in Boston Scientific Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit
Boston Scientific is one of six transvaginal mesh manufacturers that face thousands of personal injury lawsuits related to their products. The company has some upcoming litigation in 2014, including bellwether trials.
Recently, Boston Scientific filed a motion of summary judgment related to one of the personal injury claims, which they believed had been filed after California’s two-year statute of limitations for personal injury cases. However, Judge Joseph R. Goodwin, who presides over multiple transvaginal mesh MDLs in the US District Court of West Virginia, denied the motion.
According to court documents, the unnamed plaintiff underwent pelvic surgery in January 2010. Her surgeon implanted the Pinnacle Pelvic Floor Repair Kit and an Advantage Transvaginal Mid-Urethral Sling System. After the surgery, the plaintiff began to experience classic symptoms of a failing transvaginal mesh device, including vaginal discharge, itching, and abdominal cramping. By September 2010, she had suffered several revision surgeries to have a large portion of the transvaginal mesh excised, but she continued to suffer abdominal pain. The plaintiff claims that her doctor never suggested that the transvaginal mesh was responsible for her injuries, and she did not learn that was a possibility until she saw a television advertisement in August 2011 that listed her symptoms and described transvaginal mesh litigation.
She filed her transvaginal mesh personal injury lawsuit in September 2012.
Boston Scientific moved for summary judgment – in which the lawsuit does not go to trial but instead receives an immediate ruling from the judge – because the company claimed that the plaintiff’s claim was filed after California’s statute of limitations. However, Judge Goodwin disagreed, writing that there was a genuine question of material fact regarding when the plaintiff suspected her transvaginal mesh caused her personal injury.
According to court documents, Boston Scientific currently faces 8,600 personal injury lawsuits alleging that the company’s transvaginal mesh devices are the cause.
History of Transvaginal Mesh Problems
Transvaginal mesh was originally developed in 1996 and approved by the FDA for organ prolapse that caused vaginal pain and stress urinary incontinence. The original transvaginal mesh, Boston Scientific’s ProtoGen, was recalled in 1999, but due to an FDA approval loophole called 510(k) – which fast-tracks approval of devices similar to previously-approved devices – many other medical manufacturing companies began developing transvaginal mesh devices of their own.
The six current transvaginal mesh MDLs are:
- C.R. Bard MDL 2187: In Re C. R. Bard, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation.
- Johnson & Johnson/Ethicon MDL 2327: In Re Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation
- American Medical Systems MDL 2325: In Re American Medical Systems, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation
- Boston Scientific MDL 2326: In Re Boston Scientific Corp. Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation
- Mentor ObTape MDL 2004: In re Mentor Corp. ObTape Transobturator Sling Products Liability Litigation
- Coloplast MDL 2387: IN RE: Coloplast orp. Pelvic Support Systems
Recently, due to the high number of personal injury claims involving transvaginal mesh devices, CR Bard, Endo Health Solutions, Boston Scientific, Coloplast, and Cook Medical, began settlement talks. Reportedly, these five transvaginal mesh manufacturers faced a total of 30,000 personal injury lawsuits. Johnson & Johnson, meanwhile, has not agreed to any settlement talks and will continue facing bellwether trials in its MDL in Virginia.
The Strom Law Firm Fights for Women in Transvaginal Mesh Personal Injury Case
Transvaginal mesh kits were initially produced to help with pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. Several varieties of mesh kits exist, but transvaginal mesh specifically was supposed to produce less scarring and pain, because the procedure was less invasive. However, vaginal mesh slings can cause a host of problems, including organ perforation, infection, internal scarring, continued organ prolapse, and bleeding. If you or a loved one has pelvic organ prolapse or stress urinary incontinence, have had a transvaginal mesh device implanted, and have since experienced detrimental complications, you may be entitled to compensation. The experienced lawyers at Strom Law, LLC can help. We offer free consultations, so please contact us today, and we can help get you on the road to recovery. 803.252.4800