“Not Being Heard Is No Reason For Silence”  – Victor Hugo

Bradley/Grombacher gives a voice to those injured by big insurance, pharmaceutical and Fortune 500 companies and works tirelessly to vindicate the rights of our clients who have been wronged.

New Lawsuit Joins Mass Litigation Over CR Bard Blood Clot Filter Problems

A plaintiff from Pennsylvania had joined hundreds of other patients suing medical device manufacturers C.R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. for allegedly placing dangerous and defective blood clot filters on the market that have been linked to at least 27 deaths and hundreds of reports of problems from patients implanted with them.

The filters, known as Inferior Vena Cava (or “IVC”) filters are small, spider-like metal devices that are implanted into the largest vein of the body to stop blood clots from traveling from the lower body to the lungs, where they can cause death.

IVC filters are often implanted temporarily or even permanently into patients who have undergone lower body surgery such as a hip replacement or knee replacement and are at risk for blood clots.

It has been reported that by 2012, an estimated 260,000 U.S. patients had been implanted with an IVC blood clot filter.

CR Bard Blood Clot Filter Problems

Plaintiff Nafeesah Y.W. alleges in the CR Bard blood clot filter lawsuit that he was implanted with the G2® Vena Cava Filter in June 2007 and suffered injuries as a result, which neither he nor his doctor were warned about.

The G2 blood clot filter is one of seven filters listed in a Master Complaint against the defendants, which includes IVC filters sold under the following brand names:

  • Recovery® Vena Cava Filter
  • G2® Vena Cava Filter
  • G2® Express Vena Cava Filter
  • G2® X Vena Cava Filter
  • Eclipse® Vena Cava Filter
  • Meridian® Vena Cava Filter
  • Denali® Vena Cava Filter

Bard was the first medical device manufacturer to obtain FDA clearance for marketing a “retrievable” IVC filter (the Bard Recovery filter) in July 2003.

According to the master CR Bard blood clot filter complaint, “this ‘clearance’ was obtained despite a lack of adequate testimony on the safety and efficacy of the new line of devices.”

According to the complaint, Bard did not adequately research problems that can be caused by the CR Bard blood clot filters. Further, says the complaint, when other scientists discovered the side effects, Bard failed to warn patients and doctors about the side effects. Instead, alleges the plaintiff, Bard focused on marketing the IVC filters and obtaining a bigger share of the market.

“Bard targeted the bariatric, trauma, orthopedic and cancer patient population,” notes the complaint. “Expansion to these new patient groups would triple sales and the first manufacturer to market would capture market share.”

However, patients continue to experience serious side effects after being implanted with CR Bard blood clot filters. In fact, research reveals that the IVC filters do not actually prevent the blood clots they were designed to prevent.

“Bard’s retrievable IVC filters have been plagued with problems – all created by Bard itself – most notably, the absence of any evidence that the products were effective in preventing pulmonary embolism (the very condition the product was indicated to prevent),” states the CR Bard blood clot filter lawsuit.

Side Effects of CR Bard Blood Clot Filters

Those who have been implanted with CR Bard blood clot filters have reported:

  • Chest pain,
  • Shortness of breath,
  • Hemorrhage,
  • Severe pain,
  • Cardiac/pericardial tamponade, and
  • Death

Blood clot filter complications also include reports of the devices migrating, perforating veins and organs, and breaking apart.

Bard IVC Filter Litigation

Hundreds of patients have sued C.R. Bard over problems caused by a CR Bard blood clot filter. Many of these lawsuits have been consolidated into a defective medical device mass tort known as In re: Bard IVC Filters Products Liability Litigation, MDL 2641.

Due to the large number of plaintiffs suing Bard, a Master Complaint was created for the convenience of the Court and all parties to serve as a “long form” complaint that includes all of the allegations that some or all Plaintiffs allege against Bard. This allows plaintiffs to conveniently fill out a “short form” complaint and check off their allegations against the defendant.

The complaint alleges that patients who received the CR Bard blood clot filters suffered serious side effects.

“The injuries suffered and damages sought by Plaintiffs…may include, without limitation: wrongful death of a spouse, child, parent, or other legally-cognizable relationship; pain and suffering; bodily injuries of any type (including, without limitation, perforation of organs and venous structures, thromboembolic events, and cardiovascular injuries); disability; impairment; scarring; disfigurement; dismemberment; physical; emotional and psychological trauma; anxiety; diminished capacity; loss of consortium; hedonic damages; past medical expenses; future medical expenses; caregiving costs; lost wages; loss of earning capacity; and any other form of damages under the law of any forum which governs any individual case,” states the Master Complaint.

Do You Have a Legal Claim?

If you or a loved one received an IVC blood clot filter and are experiencing any medical problems, you should contact a medical professional immediately. Your filter may have migrated or pieces of the filter may be close to your heart or lungs. The blood clot filter may need to be removed.

Those who have experienced problems with their C.R. Bard blood clot filter or another type of IVC filter should consider contacting an experienced attorney. An attorney may be able to help you recover compensation for medical expenses, pain and suffering, and more.

Fill out the form on this page now for a FREE legal review of your claims. If you have a case, you will be contacted for a no cost, no obligation consultation on how to proceed with taking legal action.

Request a Free Consultation

If you feel that your rights have been violated, call our experienced attorneys for a free evaluation.

Our Notable Victories

  • Galvan v. Doe $6,750,000
  • Valenzuela v. Doe $6,200,000
  • Gaisano v. Doe Tire Company $1,675,000
  • Smuckler v. City of South Pasadena $4,000,000
  • Gutierrez v. Dole $2,455,000
  • Gould v. Casares $2,450,000
  • Gonzalez v. Brown $2,000,000
  • Silberberg v. Titus $1,800,000
  • Doe Plaintiffs v. Doe Tire Company $1,675,000
  • Buffington v. HDMC $1,400,000
/

Reasons Why Clients Continue to Choose Us

  • No upfront payments required. We get paid when you do!
  • Excellent communication & access to our attorneys.
  • Proven track record of success. Just take a look at our cases!
  • Hablamos Español! We can assist you in both English and Spanish.

Highly Esteemed & Accomplished

  • We highly recommend!

    “Marcus guided us through the entire process with professionalism & compassion. His knowledge, thoroughness, and experience ensured the best possible outcome for our case and we highly recommend him.”

    - Kylie & Daniel C.
  • Marcus Bradley is a wonderful lawyer.

    “This settlement made it possible for my sister to have a much better life than I thought would be possible.”

    - Ellen T.
/

Your Rights Deserve Justice

Schedule a Free Consultation
  • Please enter your first name.
  • Please enter your last name.
  • Please enter your phone number.
    This isn't a valid phone number.
  • Please enter your email address.
    This isn't a valid email address.
  • Please make a selection.
  • Please enter a message.