Januvia MDL Established

By Buck Daniel

May 1, 2014 – The judge managing the diabetes drug MDL has filed several orders shaping the next steps in the litigation. On Oct. 15, 2013, Judge Lloyd D. George filed an order scheduling a hearing on transferring several new cases to drugs Januvia, Byetta and Victoza pancreatic cancer MDL. This includes hearings to determine if several pending lawsuits will be transferred to the MDL. A second order was issued on Oct. 21, 2013. This order consisted of a transfer of eight individual lawsuits to the existing Januvia cancer MDL. Over 56 individual Januvia lawsuits have joined the MDL so far. The MDL is formally titled In Re: Incretin-Based Therapies Products Liabilities Litigation, MDL No. 2452, in the United States District Court for the District of California. The United States Judicial Panel for on Multidistrict Litigation is presiding over the transfers and managing certain other aspects of the case.

Januvia and related drugs work by interfering with the DPP-4 enzyme. While this can help control blood sugar, this enzyme is also involved in the suppression of tumor growth. So interfering with this enzyme may promote the growth and spread of cancer cells. Recently, this hypothetical risk has been supported by peer-reviewed studies, which indicate a link between the diabetes drugs and an increased risk of developing pancreatic cancer.

Actos MDL: First Trial Verdict

By Buck Daniel

April 30, 2014 – Since our last update, there has been a great deal of activity in the Actos litigation. As of the end of March 2014, there were over 5,000 Actos cases filed in the MDL and Illinois State Court and another 1,000 still expected in the months ahead. That aside, I am happy to report that on April 7, 2014, a jury in Louisiana returned a big Plaintiff’s verdict against the named defendants to punish their wrongful conduct and actions. Although the Court will lower the punitive damage award to a much smaller number and the defendants will appeal the case, this is a terrific result and outcome. Hopefully, it will put the defendants on notice of what Actos has done to thousands of families like yours and steer them in the direction of accepting responsibility for the actions.

More on the trial: Following 34 days of trial, a Louisiana jury ordered Japanese drug maker Takeda Pharmaceutical Company and drug maker Eli Lilly & Co. to pay compensatory and punitive damages after finding the companies’ diabetes drug Actos caused Terrance Allen to develop bladder cancer. Mr. Allen used Actos for over 5 years prior to his development of bladder cancer and was a non-smoker his entire life. The punitive damage award likely stems from evidence that Takeda lost or destroyed critical documents from as many as 46 employees and sales representatives. The missing files belonged to high-ranking Takeda employees who were heavily involved in the development, sales, marketing, and promotion of Actos. Other missing files belonged to rank-and-file sales representatives whose day-to-day work involved marketing and distributing Actos.

There is another Actos trial going on right now in Nevada involving two women, Ms. Bertha Triana, 80, and Ms. Delores Cipriano, 81, who claim Actos caused them to develop bladder cancer as well. Additionally, other Actos trials are being scheduled through the remainder of 2014 and 2015. As these trials unfold, we will keep you posted on the results.

PRADAXA CASE UPDATE

By Buck Daniel

August 14, 2013 – More than 700 Pradaxa cases have now been filed in the Southern District of Illinois before Judge David Herndon. The majority of these cases claim gastrointestinal bleeding injuries, but there have also been many catastrophic bleeding events such as hemorrhagic stroke. Judge Herndon has set “Early Trials” or bellwether trials from the pool of already filed cases to begin on August 11, 2014. By doing so, the conclusion of these trials may set the tone for whatever jury awards or settlements, if any, plaintiffs with similar claims should receive.

Many of our clients’ cases have already been filed in the Pradaxa MDL, and our next step towards resolving your claim is to complete a court ordered Plaintiff’s Fact Sheet (PFS). This PFS includes a brief personal and medical history as a part of the pre-trial discovery phase of the lawsuit. If you have not yet completed, or received, a PFS, please be in contact with our office immediately. Once completed, we can move onto the next important step in this process by evaluating your case with a thorough understanding of your entire background.

AN UPDATE ON THE TRANSVAGINAL MESH CASES

By Kim Truongle –

December 6, 2012 – There are transvaginal mesh cases against many manufacturers moving forward across the country.

Johnson & Johnson pulled some of its mesh products off the market earlier this year. State-court cases against Johnson & Johnson are set to begin in New Jersey early next year.

The first MDL trial against the Bard Defendants is currently set for Spring of 2013. Earlier this year, there was a substantial amount of buzz surrounding a California Bard trial. It is important to be cautious of information on the internet and in the press regarding that trial. There were specific and unusual facts in that case that led to the outcome. Although there will be some indirect effect on our cases from that California trial, it is important to not assume that that the outcome there is an indicator of how any particular case may end up.

A new MDL was created in recent months in the Southern District of West Virginia, adding to the four other mesh MDLs already established in this court. The new MDL governs federal cases relating to the manufacturer Coloplast. We have filed cases in the Southern District of West Virginia and are active in this court system.

The Southern District of West Virginia Judge overseeing all mesh MDL cases has set forth strict Orders regarding requirements and deadlines that must be met. We are contacting our clients if any of those deadlines happen to apply to her individual case. It is important to note that there are key statements regarding what must be provided to the Defendants in these cases, and one of the most interesting items relates to the internet and social media. Anything a Plaintiff posts online, including onto social media sites such as Facebook or Twitter, and which relates to her experience with her mesh, must be saved and provided to the Defendants. Therefore, it is important that anyone involved in these cases be mindful before making any online post.

Meanwhile, we are diligently working on behalf of our transvaginal mesh clients, and we are handling each case on an individual basis. This process can take time, and it is normal for there to be seeming lulls in the individual case process as we investigate additional developments in the general cases. Clients and potential clients are always welcome to phone our office directly at (800) 269-3050 for more information. Our national pharmaceutical litigation firm has a dedicated team of attorneys, paralegals, and case managers actively working on the transvaginal mesh cases.