An attorney representing a woman claiming that she was harmed by the Paragard IUD made by Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. on Thursday told the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation that cases over the birth control device should be sent to a federal judge in Atlanta in part because the judge is a woman and the litigation concerns women’s products.
“We believe that she is the best judge to get this of all proposed because she is a woman and this is a woman’s product dealing with women’s issues.,” Robert Hammers, plaintiff for the attorney, said.
The plaintiffs in the suits claim that the intrauterine devices implanted within them subsequently broke while they were being removed, causing them injury as pieces of the devices remained stuck in their uteruses. They claim Teva and Cooper Companies Inc. knew about the defect and the device’s propensity for breaking but failed to alert physicians or government regulators while overstating the benefits of the device.
“This is about attorney advertising and an uptick in that advertising promoted by movant’s counsel, not a genuine mass tort,” Teva and Cooper said in October. “It portends a model that plays out in MDLs in which cases are filed and added to the MDL not because they are meritorious, but rather because cases can easily be filed, escape individual scrutiny and artificially inflate case counts for settlement.”
An attorney representing a woman claiming that she was harmed by the Paragard IUD made by Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. on Thursday told the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation that cases over the birth control device should be sent to a federal judge in Atlanta in part because the judge is a woman and the litigation concerns women’s products.
“We believe that she is the best judge to get this of all proposed because she is a woman and this is a woman’s product dealing with women’s issues.,” Robert Hammers, plaintiff for the attorney, said.
The plaintiffs in the suits claim that the intrauterine devices implanted within them subsequently broke while they were being removed, causing them injury as pieces of the devices remained stuck in their uteruses. They claim Teva and Cooper Companies Inc. knew about the defect and the device’s propensity for breaking but failed to alert physicians or government regulators while overstating the benefits of the device.
“This is about attorney advertising and an uptick in that advertising promoted by movant’s counsel, not a genuine mass tort,” Teva and Cooper said in October. “It portends a model that plays out in MDLs in which cases are filed and added to the MDL not because they are meritorious, but rather because cases can easily be filed, escape individual scrutiny and artificially inflate case counts for settlement.”
A New York woman is suing units of Teva Pharmaceuticals and Cooper Companies Inc in federal court, alleging she was injured when a piece of a birth control implant they make and sell broke while it was being removed.
Vanesha Johnson told the court that Teva promoted and marketed the ParaGard IUD as safe and effective and without hormones or other side effects of other birth control methods. However, they failed to warn her or her physician that the arms of the device could break while being implanted.
Johnson had to undergo surgery to have the arm of the device removed and told the court she has suffered a range of injuries as a result, including loss of reproductive health, pain, suffering, mental anguish and loss of enjoyment of life, on top of the medical bills.
She alleges Teva overstated the benefits of the ParaGard while downplaying the risks and failed to warn that it could break and injure her. According to the complaint, Teva knew or should have known about its defects based on trials, third-party studies, and consumer experience and complaints. Additionally, the complaint states that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has received more than 1,600 reportss of the ParaGard breaking, with more than 700 of those reports considered to be serious.
Johnson is seeking unspecified damages for 11 separate counts, including negligence, common law fraud, breach of express and implied warranty, design and manufacturing defects, failure to warn, and violations of consumer protection laws.
A New York woman is suing units of Teva Pharmaceuticals and Cooper Companies Inc in federal court, alleging she was injured when a piece of a birth control implant they make and sell broke while it was being removed.
Vanesha Johnson told the court that Teva promoted and marketed the ParaGard IUD as safe and effective and without hormones or other side effects of other birth control methods. However, they failed to warn her or her physician that the arms of the device could break while being implanted.
Johnson had to undergo surgery to have the arm of the device removed and told the court she has suffered a range of injuries as a result, including loss of reproductive health, pain, suffering, mental anguish and loss of enjoyment of life, on top of the medical bills.
She alleges Teva overstated the benefits of the ParaGard while downplaying the risks and failed to warn that it could break and injure her. According to the complaint, Teva knew or should have known about its defects based on trials, third-party studies, and consumer experience and complaints. Additionally, the complaint states that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has received more than 1,600 reportss of the ParaGard breaking, with more than 700 of those reports considered to be serious.
Johnson is seeking unspecified damages for 11 separate counts, including negligence, common law fraud, breach of express and implied warranty, design and manufacturing defects, failure to warn, and violations of consumer protection laws.
