Plaintiffs Bring Motion to Centralize Port Catheter Litigation
When there are a number of different cases pending in various districts against common defendants and featuring common factual and legal issues, it may be appropriate for plaintiffs to seek to have the cases centralized in a single district. When cases are centralized in this way, pretrial proceedings and discovery can be streamlined. Centralization also prevents judges’ inconsistent rulings on various pretrial matters, particularly evidentiary challenges. Recently, the plaintiffs in 19 lawsuits moved to centralize the port catheter litigation in the Western District of Missouri. These are lawsuits brought against defendants AngioDynamics, Inc., Navilyst Medical Inc., and PFM Medical, Inc in connection with the port catheters they manufacture—these are medical devices used to obtain easy access to veins and administer long-term intravenous treatments like chemotherapy. Patients have reported serious injuries believed to be the result of the devices. Many product liability lawsuits have been filed against the manufacturers.
Call Moll Law Group About Your Port Catheter Products Claim
The port catheter litigation involves 23 pending lawsuits in 16 districts. There are 33 possible tag-along actions. Defendants AngioDynamics, Inc. and Navilyst Medical Inc. opposed centralization in Missouri. Alternatively, they suggested centralizing the actions in the Northern District of New York, the Southern District of California, or the Middle District of Alabama. Likewise, defendant PFM Medical, Inc., opposed the plaintiffs’ motion and suggested centralization in the Southern District of California and didn’t object to centralization in the Northern District of New York.
The United States Judicial Panel found that the lawsuits involved common factual questions and that centralizing the matters in the Southern District of California would serve the parties’ and witness’ convenience and promote just and efficient conduct in the lawsuits.