Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Personal Injury Law Blogs -> Drug Injury Watch
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Personal Injury Law
: Drug Injury WatchJune 18 Congressional Subcommittee Meeting About Medical Device Safety Act of 2009
By Tom Lamb
This Bill, If Passed, Would Restore An Injured Patient's Right To Sue A Medical Device Manufacturer By Reversing Riegel v. Medtronic Ruling
(Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com)
On June 18, 2009 the Health Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee will have a hearing on the Medical Device Safety Act of 2009 (H.R. 1346).
This June 18 hearing has been titled "Medical Devices: Are Current Regulations Doing Enough for Patients?" It is my understanding that this hearing is intended to be a follow-up to the Health Subcommittee's May 12, 2009 hearing on H.R. 1346.
At this June 18 hearing I hope the idea of keeping medical device patients safe by maintaining "complementary" systems, i.e., the FDA and our civil court system, is stressed and understood. In order to insure that our medical devices are effective and safe we need both a rigorous FDA device-approval process and court access when a defective device harms a patient.
Unfortunately, as a result of the United State Supreme Court's decision in the Riegel v. Medtronic case -- which was handed down in the first part of 2008 -- injured patients are currently barred from going into the court system and holding medical device manufacturers legally accountable for an injury caused by a defective device, e.g., Sprint Fidelis lead wire malfunction victims.
From my perspective, this current situation is not fair to injured patients and that is why we need Congress to pass the Medical Device Safety Act of 2009 into law. Simply put, this bill would prevent medical device manufacturer from receiving total immunity as regards any patient injury claim simply by pointing to the FDA's prior approval of its device. Instead, if passed, the Medical Device Safety Act would allow an injured patient to recover legal compensation when her injury was caused by a defective medical device.
What do you think about this issue of whether the federal preemption doctrine should be applied so as to prevent injured patients from suing a medical device manufacturer?
Full post as published by Drug Injury Watch on June 17, 2009 (boomark / email).
Firestone Tire Problems Raise Questions of Safety
Are Your Car Tires Safe?
National Practitioner Data Bank Fact
NPDB identifies unprofessional healthcare practitioners
Military Veterans Benefits
How to obtain full range of benefits for veterans and dependnets
Military Veterans Benefits, Part 2
Training, Healthcare, and Death Benefits
Patent Infringement
Cardia agrees to pay $2.25 million settlement in medical device lawsuit.
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation
US Auto
Meeting Notification Regarding $10 Million Class Action Settlement.
Medtronic CD Horizon
allegedly recalled as defective device for being prone to failure, shearing and cable breaks.
Safety Violations
Murphy Oil USA Inc. to pay $179,100 settlement in occupational safety violations lawsuit.
Ballot Device
Election Systems and Software agrees to pays city of San Francisco $3.5 million settlement after problems with AutoMARK lead to prolonged hand counting of votes.

Hearings on the Medical Device Safety Act of 2009
Medical Device Safety Act hearing, the PR angle
FDA to hold strategic meeting on medical devices
Preemption: Congress moving on medical device legislation
House Hears Testimony on Medical Device Bill that Reverses SCOTUS
Food and Drug Administration Meeting Shows Patient Safety at Risk









