MDL panel considers P&G aerosol deodorants, Abbott Labs formula –

SummaryCompaniesLaw firmsRelated documentsAtrium battles consolidation of ProLite, ProLoop hernia mesh casesProcter & & Gambles aerosol products, Abbott preemie formulas and Columbia River dams will also be considered(Reuters) – The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation will meet in New Orleans on Thursday to hear movements to combine or coordinate pretrial proceedings in item liability cases over Atrium Medicals ProLite and ProLoop hernia mesh items, Procter & & Gambles spray-on deodorants, and Abbott Laboratories preterm infant nutrition formulas.The court will also consider Columbia Riverkeepers movement to create an MDL for 2 cases implicating the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers of violating the Clean Water Act.fRegister now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.comRegisterMDL No. 3024 − In re Atrium Medical Corporation ProLite and ProLoop Hernia Mesh Products Liability LitigationAtrium Medical, which has an international settlement pending in the C-QUR hernia mesh MDL in New Hampshire, is fighting to avert a new MDL over its ProLite and ProLoop fit together products.Plaintiffs Jose Avila of California and Clark Kolbeck of Wisconsin seek to combine their 2021 suits with two that were filed in 2017 and 2018, and another five that started this year. The complainants all allege they were hurt by labeling, production and design defects in ProLite or ProLoop items and that Atrium stopped working to caution doctors about the risks related to the internal use of mesh made from layered polypropylene.Avila and Kolbeck suggest designating the cases to U.S. District Judge Christina Snyder in Los Angeles, where Avilas action is pending.Atrium rejects the claims and states an MDL is unneeded. It says informal coordination has actually worked well so far, and that discovery is nearly complete in the two earliest cases.If the panel does develop an MDL, Atrium suggests appointing it to U.S. District Judge Mary Rowland in Chicago. She presided over a jury trial in another ProLite case last October, which resulted in a defense verdict.For Atrium Medical: Mark Cheffo of DechertFor the Avila and Kolbeck: Dan Bolton of Keller, Fishback & & Jackson; Adam Evans of Brenes Law GroupMDL No. 3025 − In Re: Procter & & Gamble Aerosol Products Marketing and Sales Practices LitigationProcter & & Gamble is seeking MDL treatment for “all consumer class actions challenging P&Gs aerosol items,” originating from 2 reports by independent drug store Valisure that discovered they might include benzene, a human carcinogen.P&& G initiated voluntary recalls and refund programs last year for Old Spice and Secret aerosols and about 30 other items, consisting of several brands of dry hair shampoos and conditioners, after its own tests confirmed “trace” amounts of benzene “due to a concern with (the contract makers) propellant supply.”As of Friday, 25 proposed class actions were pending in the proposed MDL, looking for financial damages and injunctive relief under state consumer protection laws. P&G has actually asked that the cases be assigned to the Southern District of Florida– either to U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles in Miami, who is managing the first-filed lawsuit; or to U.S. District Judge Anuraag Singhal in Fort Lauderdale, who is examining the proposed settlement of a comparable MDL including Johnson & & Johnsons aerosol sunscreen products.None of the complainants oppose debt consolidation. Numerous groups who filed match in federal court in Cincinnati, where P&G is headquartered, state the MDL should be managed there.For Procter & & Gamble: Andrew Soukup of Covington & & BurlingFor the Ohio advocates: Joseph Braun of Strauss Troy; Jonathan Shub of Shub Law; Steven Bloch of Silver Golub & & Teitell, and othersMDL No. 3026 − In re Abbott Laboratories, et al, Preterm Infant Nutrition Products Liability LitigationFacing a quickly growing list of suits and a marketing blitz by complainants attorneys, Abbott Laboratories and Mead Nutrition are seeking to consolidate cases declaring that cows milk-based formulas and supplements offered to hospitalized premature infants causes them to die or sicken from a condition known as necrotizing enterocolitis, or NEC.Abbott, which makes the Similac brand, denies the claims and states its items increase the infants opportunities of survival. There were 17 cases pending in federal courts across the country when it filed its motion to develop the MDL in January. As of Friday, there were at least 40, with much more in state courts.Enfamil-maker Mead supports Abbotts motion for consolidation and task to U.S. District Judge Stefan Underhill in Connecticut, who has more than 2 years experience supervising the earliest NEC cases.Several complainants have recommended other places– especially in Illinois, where Abbotts headquarters are situated and where dozens of state-court lawsuits are pending.For Abbott Laboratories: Stephanie Parker and Meir Feder of Jones DayFor Mead Nutrition: Rachel Cannon of Steptoe & & JohnsonFor the Illinois supporters: Jose Rojas and Stephen Reck of Levin, Rojas, Camassar & & Reck; C. Andrews Charles of Levin, Papantonio, Rafferty, Proctor, Buchanan, OBrien, Barr & & Mougey; Wendy Fleishman of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & & Bernstein, and moreMDL No. 3027 − In Re: Columbia River Dams Clean Water Act Litigation (No. II)Columbia Riverkeeper seeks MDL treatment for twin claims it submitted in federal courts in Oregon and Washington last December, implicating the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers of illegally contaminating the Columbia River with hot water, oil and toxic chemicals from 3 dam sites.The Corps agrees that the cases need to be transferred to Chief U.S. District Judge Stanley Bastian in Richland, Washington. And, while both sides acknowledge that it may be possible to have the Oregon case transferred to Bastian without including the panel, they state an MDL is “more efficient and certain,” and would be constant with the history of the litigation.The two suits are remnants of an earlier MDL over the Corps operation of the very same dams and numerous others along the Columbia and Snake rivers. Under a 2014 settlement, the Corps consented to get discharge permits for the dams, and Columbia Riverkeeper concurred to offer it 7 years to do so.The Dalles, John Day and McNary dams still have no licenses, in infraction of the Clean Water Act, Riverkeeper alleges.The panel will decide the movement without hearing an argument.For Columbia Riverkeeper: Brian Knutsen of Kampmeier & & KnutsenFor the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: Mark Nitczynski and Todd Kim of the U.S. Justice DepartmentRegister now for FREE endless access to Reuters.comRegisterOur Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.