ADVERTISEMENT



Google       
Call (866) 635-2689 for a free Personal Injury evaluation by attorney in your area.

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Personal Injury Law Blogs -> San Antonio Personal Injury Lawyer

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Personal Injury Law

: San Antonio Personal Injury Lawyer

Lawsuits Consolidated against Manufacturer of Defective Urinary Device

By Beth Janicek

ADVERTISEMENTS

I wrote a blog last month about the FDA’s quick review of certain medical devices and I referenced a “fast-track” approved device meant to help women with urinary issues but the device ended up being recalled. Similar urinary devices have made the news again due to recent lawsuits against a device manufacturer. The problematic device is a sling that is surgically implanted to treat stress urinary incontinence, which often is brought on by coughing, sneezing or exercise, and is common in women after childbirth. The product was removed from the market in 2006.

Now there are 32 pending lawsuits against Mentor Corp., a Santa Barbara, Calif.-based cosmetic surgery device manufacturer. The Plaintiffs claim Mentor was negligent in their design of the ObTape device and that they failed to properly warn patients of the risks of injury created by the device. The FDA issued a general warning to doctors about potential risks connected to these slings but the FDA did not specifically name the ObTape device.

A recent California jury verdict came down in favor of Mentor because the jury concluded the doctors knew of the risks involved when they implanted the ObTape. But, the litigation does not end there; a U.S. District Court in Georgia recently consolidated 22 lawsuits against Mentor regarding the ObTape device. Gary Blasingame, a lawyer handling some of the women’s cases said, “What they’re claiming is that because of the defective device, this ObTape, these women have experienced serious medical injuries and problems. We think it's a significant series of cases, and we think this product is one that we have alleged in our complaint and anticipate will be proven is defective."

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Beth Janicek

Full post as published by San Antonio Personal Injury Lawyer on January 07, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0171 secs (new cache)