A company that invents original technologies, unique compositions, or special development processes (“IP”) knows intuitively that it must protect those interests to stay ahead of the competition. However, knowing how to protect that IP is not quite so instinctual.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently was asked to determine whether “a party seeking a preliminary injunction pursuant to the Lanham Act, is entitled to a presumption of irreparable harm.” Ferring Pharms.. Inc. v. Watson Pharms.. Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 16426 at *1 (3d Cir. N.J. Aug. 26, 2014). The Court, departing from the decisions of many federal courts over the years, held that a trademark owner who seeks to enjoin someone else from unlawfully using his trademark, must establish irreparable harm through competent proofs, and may not rely on a “presumption” of such harm. Read More about U.S. Court of Appeals Addresses Presumption of Irreparable Harm: Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
The litigation against manufacturers of pelvic mesh devices continues to increase nationwide. A pelvic mesh implant is a synthetic material implanted and tied to ligaments or bone to lift and support internal organs. The implants were introduced over a decade ago, and can serve as an alternative to a hysterectomy. Thousands of women, who were allegedly uninformed about the dangers involved with the mesh implants, have since complained of injuries, including severe pain, infections and bleeding that often require follow-up surgeries.
As we previously reported, a Texas jury awarded $1.2 million to a woman that suffered injuries from her Ethicon pelvic mesh device. A federal jury in West Virginia recently awarded plaintiff Jo Huskey and her husband Allen, $3.27 million in the second bellwether trial against Ethicon. Ms. Huskey had alleged that the TVT-O pelvic mesh sling device, manufactured by Ethicon, was defectively designed and that Ethicon had failed to properly warn of the dangers of the device. The eight person jury deliberated for approximately two hours before making its decision.
If you or a loved one has experienced any injury from the use of a vaginal mesh implant, please contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against Johnson & Johnson.
The litigation against manufacturers of pelvic mesh devices continues to increase nationwide. A pelvic mesh implant is a synthetic material implanted and tied to ligaments or bone to lift and support internal organs. The implants were introduced over a decade ago, and can serve as an alternative to a hysterectomy. Thousands of women, who were allegedly uninformed about the dangers involved with the mesh implants, have since complained of injuries, including severe pain, infections and bleeding that often require follow-up surgeries.
As we have previously reported, C.R. Bard, manufacturer of the Avaulta pelvic mesh device, was believed to know of the risks associated with its device before it hit the market. There are approximately 12,500 lawsuits pending against C.R. Bard for the Avaulta device. The majority of these cases are consolidated as part of a federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) before U.S. District Judge Joseph Goodwin in the Southern District of West Virginia.
C.R. Bard has agreed to settle 500 of the pending cases for an undisclosed amount. The manufacturer has reported that it will continue to engage in settlement discussion with the remaining plaintiffs.
If you or a loved one has experienced any injury from the use of a vaginal mesh implant, please contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against a manufacturer of the vaginal mesh device.
Endo International Plc (“Endo”) has agreed to pay $830 million to resolve legal claims from women who allege that they were injured by the company’s transvaginal mesh devices. Endo said the settlement will cover a “substantial majority” of the mesh litigation brought against its American Medical Systems subsidiary. This settlement comes only one year after Endo agreed to pay $54.5 million to settle an undisclosed number of other mesh cases.
If you or a loved one has experienced any injury from the use of a vaginal mesh implant, please contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against a manufacturer.
The dangers associated with Pradaxa use are well known. Since reaching the United States’ market in 2010, Pradaxa has been linked to hundreds of deaths. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received numerous adverse event reports for injuries and complications from Pradaxa use.
Physicians and analysts have commented that the health risks associated with Pradaxa are significant. As Forbes reports, the FDA plans to address these lingering concerns. The FDA posted a request for public comment on a study it plans to conduct regarding the safety of Pradaxa. The study will “assess systematically the rates of bleeding and thromboembolic outcomes associated with the use of dabigatran and warfarin for patients with atrial fibrillation.” The major purpose of the study is to identify groups of patients who are at high risk for major bleeding events with Pradaxa.
If you or a loved one has experienced serious side effects after taking Pradaxa, you can contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
As we have previously reported, the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) granted multidistrict litigation (MDL) treatment to the incretin mimetic litigation, meaning that all federal lawsuits filed across the United States are now centralized in one judicial district. The incretin mimetic litigation, which includes the medications Byetta, Januvia/Janumet and Victoza, was centralized in the Southern District of California. This consolidation streamlines the pretrial discovery process, allowing the parties to avoid duplicative discovery and inconsistent rulings from different judges.
The Honorable Anthony J. Battaglia is presiding over the litigation in the Southern District of California. Judge Battaglia recently set deadlines for the parties regarding the composition of the Master Consolidated Answer. The court tentatively set December 31, 2013, as the deadline for when Defendants must file the Master Consolidated Answer.
If you or a loved one has suffered from pancreatic cancer after taking Byetta, Januvia/Janumet or Victoza, you can contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort/Pharmaceutical Litigation attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any potential claims.
As we have previously reported, DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. has recalled its ASR hip replacement device. There are thousands of cases pending across the country related to the ASR device. These cases continue to proceed in state and federal courts.
The New York Times reports that DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc., a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, has agreed to settle the majority of the pending ASR lawsuits. The agreement, if accepted by the court, would be one of the largest product liability settlements involving a medical device ever entered. The deal would provide compensation to approximately 7,000 to 8,000 patients who had a replacement operation.
If you have had a hip replacement, which used the DePuy ASR or DePuy Pinnacle devices, you can contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort Attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any claims that you might have against the DePuy manufactures.
As we have previously reported, recent evidence suggests that incretin mimetic medications are linked to pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer. The American Diabetes Association (ADA) has asked all pharmaceutical companies involved in the development or marketing of incretin-based medications to make patient level data on their products available for an independent review. The ADA is concerned with the causal link between these medications, commonly sold as Byetta, Januvia/Janumet and Victoza, and pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer.
The ADA is calling all pharmaceutical companies with incretin therapies in development or currently marketed to make this patient-level data available.
If you or a loved one have suffered from pancreatitis or pancreatic cancer after taking Byetta, Januvia/Janumet or Victoza, you can contact Stark & Stark and speak to one of the Mass Tort/Pharmaceutical Litigation attorneys, free of charge, who can help assess any potential claims.
As we have previously reported, DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. has recalled its ASR hip replacement device. There are thousands of cases pending across the country related to the ASR device. These cases continue to proceed in state and federal courts. Read More about DePuy ASR Lawsuits Move Forward in New Jersey
