Inferior Vena Cava (IVC)

IVC Filter Cases Continue to Move Forward

mschrama on April 29, 2019

Category: Inferior Vena Cava (IVC), Medical Devices
Tag: ICV Blood Clot Filter, ICV blood device, ICV Filter, ICV injuries

Currently, there are more than 10,000 IVC filter cases filed across the country, in state and federal courts, with a majority being filed against manufacturers, Bard Medical and Cook Medical. IVC filters are small devices surgically implanted into the inferior vena cava in an effort to catch blood clots (where they should naturally dissolve) before they travel to the lungs, causing a potentially fatal pulmonary embolism. The Bard MDL (multidistrict litigation) is venued in the District of Arizona, while the Cook MDL is venued in the Southern District of Indiana. Additionally, lawsuits are being filed against Boston Scientific for its Greenfield Vena Cava Filter in Ohio; as well as Rex Medical and Argon Medical for their Option and Option Elite IVC Filters in Pennsylvania.

The BARD IVC Court’s Utilization of Case Management Plans and Case Management Orders to Guide and Control the Multidistrict Litigation

mschrama on June 1, 2016

Category: Inferior Vena Cava (IVC), Medical Devices

IVC filter lawsuits are on the rise. On August 17, 2015, the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) consolidated the Bard IVC lawsuits, as part of a Multidistrict Litigation (“MDL”), in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. Case Management Plans and Case Management Orders for this MDL are described below.

On October 30, 2015, the MDL court issued Case Management Order #1, appointing leadership council, including Lead/Liaison and Steering Committee, and designating their duties and responsibilities for Case Management. According to the Order, the “Lead/Liaison will be (a) the only attorneys permitted to file in the Master Docket as to all actions, and (b) the only attorneys receiving Notices of Electronic Filing for pleadings and orders filed in the Master Docket for all actions.“

The Cook IVC Court’s Utilization of Case Management Plans and Case Management Orders to Guide and Control the Multidistrict Litigation

mschrama on March 29, 2016

Category: Inferior Vena Cava (IVC), Medical Devices
Tag: Cook IVC Multidistrict Litigation

IVC filter lawsuits are on the rise. On October 15, 2014, the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) designated the Cook IVC Multidistrict Litigation (“MDL”) in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. That Court has issued multiple Case Management Plans and Case Management Orders to guide and control the MDL.

On November 25, 2014, the MDL Court issued a comprehensive Case Management Plan, which designated Plaintiffs’ leadership structure (including lead counsel, liaison counsel, Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee, and Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee) and Defendants’ counsel. The MDL Court further set forth a description of the claims and defenses at issue and procedures for: pretrial pleadings and disclosures, general case discovery, bellwether selection criteria, case-specific discovery, motion practice and trial. Shortly thereafter, a form of Master Consolidated Complaint and a form of Short-Form Complaint were agreed upon and issued.

Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Claims Are on the Rise

sstark on October 28, 2015

Category: Inferior Vena Cava (IVC), Medical Devices

IVC filter lawsuits are on the rise. Essentially, an Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) filter is a small device implanted into a patient’s circulatory system in order to prevent blood clots from reaching the lungs and turning into pulmonary embolisms.

Unfortunately, there is a very high failure rate with this process; with parts of the filter breaking off and perforating the patients’ veins, or migrating to the heart, lungs and other vital organs and causing serious injury or death. In 2010, the FDA issued a warning about the risk of IVC filter devices, indicating it had received hundreds of adverse event reports since 2005. The types of adverse events and product problems reported by the FDA include device migration, filter fracture, embolization (movement of the entire filter or fracture fragments to the heart or lungs), perforation of the IVC and difficulty removing the device.

In 2012 and 2013, reliable published studies demonstrated the high rate of failure and injury from the devices was coupled with a lack of effectiveness. In May 2014, the FDA strengthened its warning and recommended that doctors remove IVC filters as soon as the risk of pulmonary embolism has passed.

Similar to TVM, there are various IVC filter manufacturers—ALN, Braun, Boston Scientific, Cordis, Crux, Rafael, etc. The two largest manufacturers appear to be Cook and Bard. The Cook lawsuits were consolidated in a Multidistrict Litigation (“MDL”) in mid-2014, and are currently pending before Judge Richard Young in the Southern District of Illinois. Just this August, the Bard lawsuits were consolidated in an MDL, and are currently pending before Judge David G. Campbell in the District of Arizona.

If you or a loved one has suffered injuries from the use of an IVC filter, it is recommended that you speak with experienced legal counsel who can help assess any potential claims.

Blog Categories