Blog

image description

Issues with an IVC (inferior vena cava) filter, which a physician has placed to help strengthen weak or damaged tissue, may lead to many unwelcome side effects and complications. These IVC filter complications can drastically alter the patient’s quality of life.  A patient suffering from serious medical complications due to an inferior IVC filter product and/or placement will be afforded the ability to seek compensation using an ivc filter lawsuit for the following reasons:

  1. The filter has migrated from its original placement position.
  2. The filter did not prevent (or lessen the severity of) a pulmonary embolism.
  3. The filter is not removable due to migration.
  4. The filter has become fractured, broken, or otherwise come apart in some way- whether or not it has migrated from its original position.
  5. The filter perforated, punctured, or otherwise caused damage to the IVC or other blood vessels.
  6. The filter has malfunctioned or broken, causing damage to other organs such as the lungs, liver, heart, kidneys, etc.
  7. The patient has had to undergo further surgery to have a malfunctioning IVC hernias filter removed.

IVC filter lawsuit update

  1. There are over 10,000 Ivc filter lawsuits pending in the United States. These IVC Filter lawsuits are pending in both Federal and State Courts.
  2. The most  IVC Filter lawsuits have been filed against Bard Medical and Cook Medical.
  3. There are currently two MDL’s:  1.) The Bard MDL located in Arizona Federal Court. 2.) The Cook Medical MDL ( MDL No. 2570 IN RE: Cook Medical, Inc., IVC Filters Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation) which is pending in Federal Court in Indiana. “Southern District of Indiana, assigned to Judge Richard L. Young and Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.” https://www.insd.uscourts.gov/mdl-case-information
  4. “Rex Medical L.P., the designer of the Option and Option Elite IVC Filters as well as the distributor of these products, Argon Medical, face a growing number of lawsuits related to injuries that plaintiffs’ complaints allege were caused by these devices. (See a detailed list of complaints and attorneys below.) We believe the majority, if not all, claims against Rex and Argon have been filed in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. Plaintiffs claim that jurisdiction is proper in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas under Pennsylvania Law partially due to the Pennsylvania citizenship of Rex Medical.” https://www.masstortnexus.com/mass-torts-news/caseload-growing-in-philadelphia-for-rex-and-argon-ivc-filter-litigation/
  5. “Boston Scientific faces a product liability lawsuit brought by the family of Ohio woman, which alleges that problems with a Greenfield Vena Cava filter caused severe internal injuries and death.  The complaint (PDF) was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio on January 12, by Julia and Raylyn Ratliff, administrators of the estate of Cinthia K. Ratliff. ” https://www.aboutlawsuits.com/greenfield-ivc-filter-lawsuit-77399/
  6. “Following a three-week-long trial, a Houston firefighter, Jeff Pavlock, was awarded more than $1.2 million by a Texas jury for the lawsuit filed against Cook Medical LLC involving an IVC filter. The plaintiff was implanted with Cook Celect IVC filter in March 2015 to avert blood clots from reaching his heart, but the filter tilted and pierced into his tissues causing an internal injury, requiring a revision surgery. The allegations include failure to warn the performing surgeon about the possible adverse effects of the defectively designed filter. Cynthia Kretz, vice president and general counsel for Cook Medical and Cook Group, expressed her disappointment saying, “we are disappointed in this outcome and do not believe this verdict is supported by the facts or the law. This one case does not change our position on continually defending this important, life-saving technology.” Cook officials stated that they plan to appeal the court’s decision on the allegations laid on them over its IVC filter.” https://www.neuralit.com/news/2018-may-28/jury-awards-plaintiff-12-m-cook-ivc-filter-lawsuit

Bard IVC Filter lawsuit MDL update:

“The U.S. District Judge presiding over all federal Bard IVC filter lawsuits indicates that the Court will consider whether to establish a separate track for cases likely to be resolved in settlement, or whether to simply begin remanding all cases after an upcoming bellwether trial.  There are currently more than 5,700 product liability cases pending in a federal multidistrict litigation, each involving allegations that plaintiffs experienced complications with IVC filters manufactured by C.R. Bard, including reports that the retrievable blood clot filters moved out of position, punctured internal organs or fractured, causing small pieces to travel throughout the body.” https://www.aboutlawsuits.com/bard-ivc-filter-remand-order-153863/

“Given similar questions of fact and law presented in the cases, the litigation has been centralized before U.S. District Judge David G. Campbell in the District of Arizona since August 2015, for coordinated discovery and a group of “bellwether” trials designed to help gauge how juries are likely to respond to certain evidence and testimony that is likely to be repeated throughout the litigation.” Id.

Bard medical MDL bellwether trial

  • 1st Bard MDL bellwether trial in 2018- Verdict for 3.6 million in favor of victim.
  • 2nd bellwether trial- Defense verdict a couple of months after the first bellwether.
  • 3rd bellwether trial- Schedule for May 2019. This trial is about the Bard Recovery Filter.

Cook Medical IVC Filter lawsuit MDL update

There are more than 5000 Cook medical IVC Filter lawsuits consolidated in to the MDL in the Southern District of Indiana.

“Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407 , the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) has transferred a number of actions to the Southern District of Indiana, assigned to Judge Richard L. Young and Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. The Plaintiffs allege defect in Cook Medical’s IVC filter, a medical device placed in the inferior vena cava to catch blood clots and stop them from traveling to the heart or lungs. The cases generally allege defective design, misrepresentation in marketing, and failure to warn doctors and patients. The Southern District of Indiana’s Master Case is: 1:14-ml-2570-RLY-TAB (PACER access required)” https://www.insd.uscourts.gov/mdl-case-information

“According to recent court filings, Cook Medical and plaintiffs lawyers are continuing settlement negotiations in an attempt to resolve IVC filter lawsuits pending throughout the federal court system, as additional “bellwether” claims are being prepared for early trial dates. There are currently more than 4,700 product liability cases filed against Cook Medical in U.S. District Courts nationwide, each involving similar allegations that Cook Celect, Cook Gunther Tulip or other inferior vena cava (IVC) filters were defectively designed and prone to migrate out of position, puncture internal organs, fracture or cause other serious health complications.” https://www.aboutlawsuits.com/cook-ivc-filter-settlement-negotiations-151304/

Important  Orders in MDL 2570

The Cook Medical IVC Filter Bellwether trials

  • 1st Cook Medical lawsuit bellwether trial- Defense verdict.
  • 2nd Cook Medical IVC Filter lawsuit bellwether trial- Case dismissed on summary judgement because the victim missed a statute of limitations  / IVC Filter deadline.
  • 3rd Cook Medical IVC lawsuit-bellwether: Jury determines that  the IVC filter is defective and awards IVC filter victim 3 million in damages. This trial went on for over a month. The IVC Filter lawsuit jury refused to award punitive damages to the victim

Greenfield IVC filter lawsuit against Boston  Scientific

“Boston Scientific produces the Greenfield™ Stainless Steel Vena Cava Filter. (It is named after Dr. Lazar Greenfield, who originally designed it.) The Greenfield™ filter is implanted in patients’ veins to stop current blood clots from traveling while maintaining as normal a blood flow as possible. According to the manufacturer website, more than one million of these devices have been implanted in the last three decades.” https://www.shouselaw.com/torts/ivc/greenfield

heart filter

The heart filter lawsuits, which are often know as  a blood clot filter lawsuit, pertain to allegations that the manufacturer of the medical device did not properly warn medical doctors and victims of the heightened risk of the heart filter breaking causing metal fragments to travel in the blood, possibly causing organ damage. Many heart filter victims are wondering:

  •  What are the ivc filter lawsuit settlements amounts?
  • How long until there will be ivc filter lawsuit settlements?
  • How do I get an ivc filter payout

What is an inferior vena cava filter placement?

“An inferior vena cava (IVC) filter is a small device that can stop blood clots from going up into the lungs. The inferior vena cava is a large vein in the middle of your body. The device is put in during a short surgery.

Veins are the blood vessels that bring oxygen-poor blood and waste products back to the heart. Arteries are the blood vessels that bring oxygen-rich blood and nutrients to the body. A deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a blood clot that forms in a vein deep inside the body. A clot occurs when blood thickens and clumps together. In most cases, this clot forms inside one of the deep veins of the thigh or lower leg.” https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/treatment-tests-and-therapies/inferior-vena-cava-ivc-filter-placement

IVC Filter Lawsuit

“Inferior vena cava filters are commonly used to prevent pulmonary embolism in patients who manifest deep vein thrombosis and recurrent pulmonary embolism despite anticoagulation, or in patients with contraindications to anticoagulation. “ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3709234/

“The first bellwether trials over medical devices that are designed to prevent blood clots during surgery have failed to carve out a clear winner, with another trial set to begin next week. About 9,000 lawsuits allege that various types of inferior vena cava filters, or IVC filters, which doctors implant in patients, have perforated or fractured in their bodies, causing pain and leading to removal surgeries. Among the several device manufacturers listed in the lawsuits, C.R. Bard Inc. and Cook Medical Inc. face the largest number of cases, clocking in over 4,000 each. https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2018/09/10/ivc-filter-trials-forging-ahead-with-3rd-bard-case-starting-monday/

Do I qualify for an IVC Filter lawsuit?

  • The victim “had an IVC Filter (Inferior Vena Cav) implanted after January 2003 and suffered any of the following injuries after receiving this implant:
  • “Device Became Non- Removable, Device Tilted, Filter Fracture, Device Migration, Filter Perforation, Device Embolization (Deatched Components), Filter Punctured Blood Vessels or Organs, Death.” (Source Consumer Awareness Group Full Service Marketing and Intake Support Center)
  • Implanted with: Bard IVC filter, Cook IVC,  Johnson and Johnson IVC.

IVC Filter victims who do not meet the above IVC lawsuit criteria should still reach out to an IVC Filter lawsuit lawyer to see whether he or she can still file an IVC filter lawsuit.

1.2 million verdict in Texas

“So far, trials have failed to identify a clear victor. Cook won the first IVC filter trial last year, but it lost a $1.2 million verdict in Texas state court on May 24. Bard lost a $3.6 million verdict on March 30, but followed up with a defense win on June 1. Judges also have granted summary judgment motions in at least two key cases slated for trials. For these reasons and more, a patient can and should seek legal representation. IVC filters have had numerous warnings and recalls over the years. It comes as little to no surprise many patients are now facing the ramifications of faulty products and/or poor placement procedures. Though the pain and suffering can not be reversed with monetary compensation, the outcome of a lawsuit against the  manufacturers of the IVC and possibly against the medical professionals in charge of the patients’ care will deliver peace of mind in a most difficult time.”  https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2018/09/10/ivc-filter-trials-forging-ahead-with-3rd-bard-case-starting-monday/

IVC filter lawsuits and IVC filter law firms

Considering all this and more will greatly reduce the chances of a patient having a negative experience. Of course, complications will arise regardless of either the doctor’s or patient’s frugality in understanding the potential outcomes. If and when that happens, finding the best legal representation is imperative. Those who are left without legal recourse to obtain compensation for time lost from work and/or other major lifestyle alterations due to the procedure or complications therefrom will find themselves less able to function in their everyday lives and see an inevitable decline in their quality of life.

IVC filter lawyer

A licensed physician is not one typically one who is out to take advantage of unhealthy patients. Though invasive surgeries may be more commonplace today than they were even twenty or thirty years ago, and our technologies and understanding of the issues have grown exponentially, there will still be those instances where something doesn’t go according to plan. Rarer, though still a prevalent issue, the doctor or surgeon made the wrong call or bungled the procedure. In those cases, seeking immediate legal representation will greatly benefit the patient in the end.Whether you or a loved one has experienced pain and issues with their IVC hernia filter or are taking preventative measures before undergoing such a procedure, it will behoove the individual to keep in mind the serious risks and potential medical complications which can, and very well may, arise in the aftermath of the surgery.

What is a Denali IVC filter? 

A Denali Ivc filter is described here: “The DENALI® Vena Cava Filter is a venous interruption device designed to prevent pulmonary embolism. TheDENALI® Filter can be delivered via the femoral and jugular/subclavian approaches. A separate delivery system isavailable for each approach. The DENALI® Filter is designed to act as a permanent filter. When clinically indicated,the DENALI® Filter may be percutaneously removed after implantation according to the instructions provided under the “Optional Procedure for Filter Removal” section.”

“The DENALI® Filter consists of twelve shape-memory laser-cut nickel-titanium appendages. These twelve appendages form two levels of filtration with the legs providing the lower level of filtration and the arms providing the upper level of filtration. The DENALI® Filter is intended to be used in the inferior vena cava (IVC) with a diameter less than or equal to 28mm.” Bard/ Davol  

heart filter

For those patients who are suffering, there is hope for a return to your previous standard of living. Though the physical problems may never fully disappear, having the right legal team fighting for your patient rights can deliver one from a state of utter despair and hopelessness to one of seeing a brighter future on the horizon!  Victims are looking for IVC filter attorneys to file IVC filter lawsuits on their behalf. AS of this date there has been no global ivc filter lawsuit settlements.  Victims are hoping for an ivc filter lawsuit settlement, as soon as possible.  An IVC filter lawsuit using a blood clot filter lawsuit lawyer will help the victim get justice and compensation for his or her complications. If you are seeking an ivc filter payout, you need to speak to a lawyer as soon as possible.