You all know we love preemption. So, when two favorable medical device preemption decisions are entered on the same day, well that’s a two-fer we can’t wait to blog about. In both cases, plaintiffs tried to plead and argue their way around PMA preemption – unsuccessfully. Here is the spin plaintiffs tried and why it didn’t work.
Bentzley v. Medtronic, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. Lexis 136570 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 28, 2011): This one involves an insulin and glucose monitoring system. The system includes a sensor/transmitter and a pump that work together to monitor the patient’s glucose levels and administer insulin automatically and continuously. Id. at *2. Plaintiff alleged that his system malfunctioned and failed to administer the correct dosage of insulin and the reason for the malfunction was that it was exposed to high-strength electromagnetic fields during his employment. Id. at *7-8. This is a known risk with this particular system and one that prompted a Class 2 Recall a year before the system was implanted in plaintiff, including the addition of warning information in the systems shipped to new customers. Id.
Please see full article below for more information.
Firefox recommends the PDF Plugin for Mac OS X for viewing PDF documents in your browser.
We can also show you Legal Updates using the Google Viewer; however, you will need to be logged into Google Docs to view them.
Please choose one of the above to proceed!
LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.