Indiana Federal Court to Hear Biomet Consolidated Hip Implant Lawsuits

Despite opposition by Biomet, the manufacturer of the M2a Magnum hip system, federal judges agreed to consolidate all current Biomet hip implant lawsuits, sending them to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana.

Houston,TX (I-Newswire) October 10, 2012 - Despite opposition by Biomet, the manufacturer of the M2a Magnum hip system, federal judges agreed to consolidate all current Biomet hip implant lawsuits, sending them to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana. Mass Device, a website covering the business of medical devices, noted that 65 pending cases were moved from other jurisdictions to the Indiana court despite protests by Biomet. According to PRWeb at Equities.com, Biomet’s objection to the consolidation revolves around the company’s contention that the current lawsuits encompass issues which are highly plaintiff-specific and are directed at a product which has not been recalled. Most other lawsuits regarding defective hip implants are directed at companies with recalled hip implants such as the DePuy ASR.

Biomet contends that because they have successfully defended and settled cases regarding the M2a Magnum in the past, they should be given that opportunity once more rather than have the current lawsuits consolidated. In the objection filed in response to the MDL (Case OHS/2:12-cv-00396) Biomet argues that the litigation is distinguishable from other metal-on-metal hip litigation because the Magnum product contains a broad array of components as compared to other MOM implants whose complaints center on the acetabular cup. Biomet also states the M2a Magnum has been available for eight years in the United States making it “as a whole, more mature and procedurally more diverse,” than other MOM lawsuits.

Further, PRWeb states that Biomet believes the M2a Magnum hip implant to have far fewer problems than similar hip implant devices. The panel of federal judges, while admitting Biomet’s arguments contained merit, did not find them strong enough to deny the request for consolidation. The consensus among the judges was that each of the lawsuits brought against Biomet regarding the M2a Magnum contained the central issue of a common defect which was responsible for the plaintiff’s alleged injuries. While agreeing that injury litigation, by its very nature, contains causation issues which are plaintiff-specific, the panel of judges deemed those differences insufficient to impede consolidation of the lawsuits.

Consolidation of these types of lawsuits generally allow the claims of plaintiff’s to be resolved in a more efficient, timely manner while conserving the resources of all those involved. MDL stands for multidistrict litigation and the procedure is meant to speed the handling of complex cases, generally those regarding defective drugs or defective medical device cases. These individual cases will show a pattern in how the alleged injuries occur, however each individual could have suffered a variety of injuries or circumstances.

Alleging the metal-on-metal design of the Biomet M2a Magnum hip implant device is defective, lawsuits MDL No. 2391 further states that this particular Biomet device can lead to early failure or higher than normal levels of metal ions known which can lead to metallosis. On July 12, 2012, a Fox News article noted that there are a variety of hip implant manufacturers currently experiencing implant recipient complaints similar to those received by Biomet including DePuy, Wright Medical and Zimmer Holdings.