New Lawsuit Alleges Complications from Zimmer NexGen Knee Implant: Now, AttorneyOne Can Provide Advice


San Diego, CA (PRWEB) November 19, 2013

AttorneyOne.com, a recognized authority on law, updated the website recently and they are now actively providing expert opinion in view of the recent news on Zimmer NexGen Knee lawsuits and potential Zimmer NexGen Knee Recall lawsuit.

A new lawsuit was filed on October 28, by a Nevada resident alleging that he suffered complications from his Zimmer NexGen Knee implant (case no. 2:2013cv01975, Nevada District Court). The NexGen Knee is manufactured by Zimmer Holdings a medical device manufacturer specializing in orthopedic implants. In the lawsuit, the plaintiff claims that he was implanted with the Zimmer NexGen Knee in 2008 and, due to complications, he had to undergo revision surgery in 2011.

On October 3, a Nevada couple filed a lawsuit in California Southern District Court (case no. 3:2013cv02373) alleging that the man suffered serious injuries from his Zimmer NexGen knee implant. In the lawsuit the plaintiff claims that he was implanted with the device in 2009 and he suffered injuries that led to revision surgery in 2011.

Taking into consideration the latest developments, AttorneyOne.com updated the website and, now, can actively provide an expert opinion including how to get in contact with legal counsel easily and inexpensively in cases of severe complications, allegedly from Zimmer NexGen knee implant. Sean Burke, director of Media Relations at AttorneyOne.com, adds that the relevant information illustrates that people continue to file Zimmer NexGen Knee lawsuits. “For that reason”, he continues, “our focus should squarely fall on getting the word out and assisting people in finding the right legal assistance.

Court data, updated on October 17 by the US Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, indicate that there are 1,077 cases currently pending in the Zimmer NexGen knee implant Multidistrict Litigation (MDL 2272, US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois).

AttorneyOne.com has further information on Zimmer NexGen Knee lawsuits including how to get in contact with legal counsel.

Headquartered in San Diego, CA Attorney One was founded in 2004 and is not a law firm. They offer a nationwide legal service which helps consumers find the best representation for their legal needs. You can learn more about Attorney One at our website http://www.attorneyone.com. You can also find us on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/AttorneyOne. Checkout earlier news from us at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/11/prweb11335839.htm







Attorney Laura Yaeger Appointed to Plaintiffs Steering Committee in Stryker MDL

(PRWEB) November 16, 2013

Morgan & Morgan is proud to announce that attorney Laura V. Yaeger has been selected to join the Plaintiffs Steering Committee for the multidistrict litigation (MDL) involving Strykers Rejuvenate and ABG II modular-neck hip implant products. The Honorable Judge Donovan W. Frank appointed various leadership roles for the Stryker MDL on November 5, 2013, and by his order, Ms. Yaeger and the other steering committee members will help conduct all pretrial proceedings.

Im very flattered to have been chosen as a member of the Plaintiffs Steering Committee, Ms. Yaeger said. Ive spoke to many patients who suffered as a result of this product, and I will work diligently to get them the justice they deserve.

In 2012, Stryker issued a voluntary recall for its Rejuvenate Modular and ABG II modular-neck hip stems. In its recall, the company claimed that the two metal hip implant components may have the potential to fret or corrode and can consequently cause pain, swelling, or other adverse tissue reactions near the implant. Soon after Strykers recall, the first lawsuit involving the companys Rejuvenate system was filed in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Bergen County, alleging similar injuries, as well as elevated levels of metal ions in the plaintiffs bloodstream, according to an August 9, 2012 article on NorthJersey.com.*

More than 40 lawsuits against Stryker were consolidated into a MDL in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota in June 2013, under an order issued by the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML). The plaintiffs allege that Strykers Rejuvenate and ABG II modular-neck hip implant products are defective, and accuse the company of failing to provide an adequate warning for the implants and failing to properly test the products before releasing them into the marketplace, according to court documents. Although Stryker requested that the MDL only include their Rejuvenate total hip system, the JPML elected to include the ABG II devices because the devices possess sufficient commonalities to warrant placement in a single MDL, according to the transfer order. The most recent statistics report** from the JPML showed more than 340 lawsuits are currently pending in the federal MDL against Stryker.

Ms. Yaeger and the mass tort attorneys at Morgan & Morgan are currently investigating claims on behalf of those who allegedly suffered as a result of Strykers hip implants. For more information, please visit http://www.forthepeople.com/class-action-lawyers/stryker-hip-replacement-lawsuit.

About Morgan & Morgan

Morgan & Morgan is one of the largest exclusively plaintiffs law firms in the country with 15 offices throughout Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Tennessee, and New York. The firm handles cases nationally involving personal injury, medical malpractice, consumer class action, and securities fraud, as well as complex litigation against drug and medical device manufacturers. Visit Morgan & Morgan online at http://www.forthepeople.com/ for a free case evaluation and information about your legal rights.

MDL Case No. 2441, in RE: Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II Hip Implant Products Liability Litigation

Resources

http://www.northjersey.com/news/Florida_woman_files_injury_suit_against_Mahwah-based_Stryker_Orthopedics.html

**http://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/Pending_MDL_Dockets_By_District-October-17-2013.pdf





As da Vinci Robot Lawsuits, Reports of Robotic Surgery Complications Mount, Bernstein Liebhard LLP Notes Calls for Better Robot Surgery Training


New York, New York (PRWEB) November 15, 2013

As da Vinci robot lawsuit (http://www.davincirobotlawsuitcase.com/) claims continue to mount, Bernstein Liebhard LLP notes that rising reports of robotic surgery complications have led to calls for improved robot surgery training protocols. According to a report from Bloomberg.com, this issue came into focus following the release of a survey of doctors conducted by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) that indicated training on the da Vinci Surgical System was an issue, due to both the difficulty of mastering the device and a lack of consistent training methods. At least one expert interviewed for the Bloomberg report likened the current state of robotic surgery training to the wild, wild west, and maintained that as da Vinci lawsuit filings continue to rise, more hospitals and medical organizations will focus on this issue.*

Training is a factor that has been cited in many da Vinci robot lawsuits. Our Firm is pleased to see that this issue is getting the attention it urgently needs, says Bernstein Liebhard LLP, a nationwide law firm representing the victims of defective drugs and medical devices. The Firm is currently offering free legal reviews of potential da Vinci lawsuits to individuals who allegedly suffered serious robotic surgery complications in procedures where the da Vinci Surgical System was used.

Da Vinci Robot Lawsuits

According to the Bloomberg.com report, Intuitive Surgical Inc., is currently named in some 50 da Vinci lawsuits filed on behalf of people who were allegedly injured by the da Vinci Surgical System. In a regulatory filing issued last month, Intuitive acknowledged that at least some of those claims allege that inadequate training on the part of the company led to patient injuries.**

An FDA survey of physicians who used the da Vinci robot that was released on November 8th also found that training was a concern among the 11 doctors who responded. According to Bloomberg.com, their responses suggested that surgeons need time to learn how to use the da Vincis foot pedals and perform operations. Two of the respondents asserted that patient safety was directly related to the surgeons training experience.

Bloomberg.com also reported that FDA adverse event reports associated with the da Vinci Surgical System more than doubled this year. Through November 3rd, the agency received 3,697 reports of robotic surgery complications involving the da Vinci. For the entire year of 2012, it received just fewer than 1,600 such reports. Those reports included injuries and deaths linked to da Vinci operations, as well as malfunctions where no injury occurred, Bloomberg said.

Robotic surgery patients who sustained serious injuries allegedly due to the da Vinci robot may be entitled to financial compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and more. To learn more about filing a da Vinci robot lawsuit, please visit Bernstein Liebhard LLPs website or the Firms Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/davincirobotlawsuit. For a free, no-obligation review of your potential da Vinci lawsuit, please call 800-511-5092.

*http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-11/robot-surgery-incidents-may-pressure-hospital-training.html;. Bloomberg.com, November 11, 2013

**sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1035267/000103526713000040/isrg-2013930x10q.htm, Intuitive Surgical, October 18, 2013.

About Bernstein Liebhard LLP

Bernstein Liebhard LLP is a New York-based law firm exclusively representing injured persons in complex individual and class action lawsuits nationwide since 1993, including those who have been harmed by dangerous drugs, defective medical devices and consumer products. The firm has been named by The National Law Journal to the Plaintiffs Hot List, recognizing the top plaintiffs firms in the country, for the past 11 consecutive years.

Bernstein Liebhard LLP

10 East 40th Street

New York, New York 10016

800-511-5092

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING.

DrugRisk Adds Latest Court Updates from NuvaRing Lawsuits


(PRWEB) November 13, 2013

The birth control safety advocates at DrugRisk.com are announcing updated information for women using the contraceptive NuvaRing. A judge overseeing patient claims alleging blood clots from the device recently postponed the first trial and ordered a count of all cases*.

DrugRisk was created to give those taking popular prescription drugs the latest product recalls, safety alerts, research and litigation news. Patients can avoid dangerous drugs, see if others are experiencing similar side effects and decide if they need legal advice.

The resource center has added warnings from health experts linking contraceptives like NuvaRing to higher risks of blood clots than traditional birth control pills. Last year, the New England Journal of Medicine published a study finding vaginal ring contraceptives could relate to a 2.5 to 3-fold increased risk of blood clots**.

Many patients have filed a NuvaRing lawsuit alleging blood clots in recent years, leading cases to be consolidated in a special federal multidistrict litigation court. The formal case is In re: NuvaRing Products Liability Litigation, No. 08-md-1964, JPML, Eastern District Missouri. The latest court records show the number of cases has grown to 1,502 as of October 17***.

Now, DrugRisk has learned that U.S. District Judge Rodney Sippel, who is overseeing the litigation, had postponed the first trial from January 27th to April 7, 2014*. He also asked that all counsel provide a census of anticipated cases****.

Anyone who suffered a blood clot, stroke, DVT or pulmonary embolism after using NuvaRing is urged to contact the DrugRisk or speak with a lawyer about their legal rights as soon as possible. However, DrugRisk only recommends lawyers and law firms who have already handled NuvaRing lawsuits.

For more information on the research, side effects and litigation news related to NuvaRing and other drugs, or to speak with a lawyer, visit http://www.DrugRisk.com.

*U.S. District Judge Rodney Sippel, 10/8/13; aboutlawsuits.com/wp-content/uploads/2013-10-08-NuvaRing-Order.pdf

**New England Journal of Medicine, 6/14/12; nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1111840

***Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, 10/17/13; jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/Pending_MDL_Dockets_By_District-October-17-2013.pdf

****U.S. District Judge Rodney Sippel, 10/8/13; aboutlawsuits.com/wp-content/uploads/2013-10-08-NuvaRing-CMO.pdf







NuvaRing Lawsuit Filed by Wright & Schulte LLC After Ohio Woman Allegedly Suffered Life-Threatening NuvaRing Blood Clots, Including Bilateral Pulmonary Emboli


Columbus, OH (PRWEB) November 13, 2013

A woman from Dayton, Ohio is being represented by Wright & Schulte LLC in a NuvaRing lawsuit, after she suffered life-threatening blood clots, including bilateral pulmonary emboli and deep vein thrombosis, allegedly due to her use of the NuvaRing vaginal birth control ring. Her NuvaRing blood clot lawsuit complaint, which was filed on September 24, 2013 in U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, claims that NuvaRing poses a substantially higher risk of blood clots, including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, compared to other hormonal forms of birth control. (Case: 3:13-cv-00328-WHR)

According to her NuvaRing lawsuit, the Plaintiff began using the device, which is the first and only vaginal birth control ring available on the market, in March or April of 2012. On April 22, 2012, when she was only 22 years old, the young woman began experiencing shortness of breath and chest pain. Upon admission to the hospital, a CT scan revealed that she had developed massive bilateral emboli, including a saddle embolus. She was immediately placed on a heparin IV, and further testing revealed that she was also suffering from a deep vein thrombosis in her right leg. As stated in the NuvaRing blood clot lawsuit, Plaintiff was placed on Coumadin, Fragmin, and Lovenox, and remained in the hospital for 15 days due to the injuries she allegedly sustained from NuvaRing.

NuvaRing Lawsuit Contends Increased Risk for Serious Blood Clots

The NuvaRing lawsuit alleges that the vaginal ring releases higher amounts of hormones than other hormonal forms of birth control, which increases the risk for serious blood clots that have the potential to cause heart attacks, stroke, and even death. The Plaintiff also accuses Merck & Co. and other Defendants named in the complaint of failing to provide adequate warnings regarding the risk of serious NuvaRing blood clots, including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, compared to oral contraceptives.

According to the NuvaRing blood clot lawsuit complaint, though the NuvaRing lawsuit was filed in the Southern District of Ohio, it is a potential tag-along action and should be transferred to the federal NuvaRing multidistrict litigation (MDL) currently underway in U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, where more than 1,500 complaints involving similar allegations of NuvaRing blood clots are currently pending. In an Order dated October 8th, Judge Rodney W. Sippel, who is overseeing the federal NuvaRing litigation, postponed its first bellwether trial until April 2014, and ordered that all discovery, motions and rulings be stayed in the federal NuvaRing lawsuits until December 2013. Judge Sippels Order also directed attorneys for plaintiffs to conduct a census of all claims they are pursuing, whether they are pending in federal court, state court or have not yet been filed. According to the Order, plaintiffs attorneys were required to provide the information sought by the Court no later than October 28, 2013. (In re NuvaRing Products Liability Litigation, MDL 1964)

Filing a Nuvaring Lawsuit Or NuvaRing Blood Clot Lawsuit

Wright & Schulte LLC continues to offer free NuvaRing lawsuit evaluations to alleged victims of NuvaRing side effects. If you or someone you love suffered a blood clot, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, heart attack, stroke or sudden death while using NuvaRing, please visit yourlegalhelp.com, or call toll-FREE 1-800-399-0795 to learn more about your options for legal recourse or filing a NuvaRing Lawsuit.

Keep up with NurvaRing lawsuit news and other information by liking Wright & Schulte LLC on Facebook.

About Wright & Schulte LLC

Wright & Schulte LLC, a leading personal injury firm, is dedicated to the belief that Americas legal system should work for the people. Every day, the attorneys of Wright & Schulte LLC stand up for the rights of people who have been injured or wronged, and fight tirelessly to ensure that even the worlds most powerful corporations take responsibility for their actions. If youre looking for a law firm that will guarantee the aggressive and personal representation you deserve, please do not hesitate to contact Wright & Schulte LLC today. Free Nuvaring Lawsuit Or NuvaRing Blood Clot Lawsuit case evaluations are available through yourlegalhelp.com, or call 1-800-399-0795.

Contact:

Wright & Schulte LLC

“An Experienced Harmful Drug Law Firm”

1-800-399-0795

http://www.yourlegalhelp.com







Pradaxa Lawsuits Progress, as Bernstein Liebhard LLP Notes Establishment of Bellwether Case Selection Protocol in Federal Pradaxa Bleeding Litigation


New York, New York (PRWEB) November 11, 2013

Pradaxa lawsuits (http://www.pradaxalawsuithelp.com/) filed on behalf of individuals who suffered serious instances of internal bleeding, allegedly due to Pradaxa, continue to move forward in a multidistrict litigation underway in U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois, Bernstein Liebhard LLP reports. According to a Case Management Order issued on November 4th, the Court has established a protocol for the selection of bellwether cases in the Pradaxa bleeding litigation. Among other things, the Order directs the parties to each select up to three individual Pradaxa lawsuits as possible bellwether cases, and submit their selections to the Court on December 15th at 5:00 p.m. By January 23, 2014, the Court will select four of those cases for the litigations first bellwether trials. Those trials are scheduled to begin in August 2014. (In Re: Pradaxa (Dabigatran Etexilate) Products Liability Litigation MDL No. 2385)

The selection of bellwether trials will mark an important milestone in the Pradaxa bleeding litigation. We are pleased to see this proceeding moving forward, says Bernstein Liebhard LLP, a nationwide law firm representing victims of defective drugs and medical devices. The Firm is currently offering free legal evaluations to alleged victims of Pradaxa bleeding side effects.

Pradaxa Lawsuits

According to court documents, at least 1,767 Pradaxa lawsuits are now pending in the litigation underway in the Southern District of Illinois. Plaintiffs allege that Boehringer Ingelheim failed to provide adequate warnings to doctors and patients regarding the lack of a readily available antidote to reverse Pradaxa bleeding.

In October, the Institute for Safe Medicine Practices (ISMP) reported that the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) had tallied more than 3,292 reports of adverse events and 582 deaths involving Pradaxa side effects in 2012, more than any other drug it tracked that year.* According to a recent Bloomberg.com report, regulators in several countries have issued Pradaxa side effect alerts, mostly due to its association with internal bleeding. Though the drug has been marketed as an improvement over warfarin, internal hemorrhaging caused by that decades-old blood thinner can be ended via the administration of vitamin K. However, there as yet exists no readily available antidote to reverse bleeding that can sometimes accompany Pradaxa use.**

Individuals allegedly injured by Pradaxa may be entitled to compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and more. Learn More about possible Pradaxa side effects by visiting Bernstein Liebhard LLPs website. For a free review of your potential Pradaxa lawsuit, please call 800-511-5092.

*ismp.org/QuarterWatch/pdfs/2012Q4.pdf, ISMP, October 17, 201

**bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-11/boehringer-sued-by-hundreds-over-bleeding-tied-to-pradaxa.html, Bloomberg.com, December 11, 2012

About Bernstein Liebhard LLP

Bernstein Liebhard LLP is a New York-based law firm exclusively representing injured persons in complex individual and class action lawsuits nationwide since 1993, including those who have been harmed by dangerous drugs, defective medical devices and consumer products. The firm has been named by The National Law Journal to the Plaintiffs Hot List, recognizing the top plaintiffs firms in the country, for the past 11 consecutive years.

Bernstein Liebhard LLP

10 East 40th Street

New York, New York 10016

800-511-5092

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING.

ObamaCare Discourages Marriage; NCPA Study: Subsidies Push People to Stay Single

Dallas, TX (PRWEB) November 08, 2013

Should you get married? The Affordable Care Act says no, according to a new study from the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA).

Just as there are penalties in the tax code for couples who get married, financial penalties in the Affordable Care Act also discourage couples from tying the knot, says Devon Herrick, senior fellow with the NCPA.

All legal U.S. residents will be allowed to purchase health coverage in the exchange. However, subsidies will only be available to qualifying individuals and families with incomes from 100 percent to 400 percent of the federal poverty level from about $ 23,550 to more than $ 94,200 for a family of four.

The exchange subsidies are rather generous to low-income individuals. However, the exchange subsidies are more generous to unmarried couples than to couples who marry. Herrick explained how the subsidies work in an op-ed this morning in Investors Business Daily.

For example: consider the case of two unmarried college students who move in together, each of whom earns about $ 23,000 annually. If that same couple married, their combined household income of nearly $ 46,000 would rise as a percent of the poverty level from 200 percent (individually) to 296 percent for a married family of two. As a result, their premiums in the health insurance exchange would be capped at a higher percentage of their income, providing a smaller total subsidy.


Individually they would each qualify for a subsidy of about $ 1,087, or $ 2,174 per household.
If that same couple were to marry, their subsidy would fall to $ 753.
Thus, their marriage penalty is $ 1,421. The exchange marriage penalty is especially pronounced for couples in moderate-income households with an income of $ 30,000 to $ 55,000 annually.

The structure of the exchange subsidies creates perverse disincentives to family formation that add to the existing marriage penalty in the tax law.

Moderate-income couples are twice as likely to forgo marriage as couples with a bachelor’s degree, said Herrick. There is something fundamentally wrong about government regulations forcing moderate-income couples to decide whether they can afford the financial penalties of marriage.

One example of the marital impact of ObamaCare is this weeks CBS News story profiling a married couple who are contemplating divorce to save money.

Source: Devon M. Herrick, The Health Exchange Marriage Penalty, National Center for Policy Analysis, November 7, 2013.

Full study: http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba788

The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan public policy research organization, established in 1983. We bring together the best and brightest minds to tackle the country’s most difficult public policy problems in health care, taxes, retirement, education, energy and the environment. Visit our website today for more information.