Many victims who were implanted with Bard Dulex hernia mesh are filing lawsuits alleging that Dulex is defective. Bard and their corporate subsidiary Davol manufacture Dulex hernia mesh. “Dulex Mesh is a dual-sided ePTFE patch for ventral hernia repair marketed by Defendants, as a mesh to be used in repairing hernias and to provide extra reinforcement to the hernia defect. Defendants’ Dulex Mesh product is a dual-sided ePTFE mesh constructed of a microporous side and a microporous side. Dulex Mesh is designed, indicated, and utilized for permanent implantation in the human body, in the intraabdominal space between the subcutaneous tissue and intestines.” UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE—KNOXVILLE DIVISION- MARTHA KAREN JONES v. DAVOL INC. and C.R. BARD INC., Complaint
On May 11, 2018 a Tennessee resident, MARTHA KAREN JONES, residing in Knox County, TN filed a hernia mesh lawsuit against C.R. Bard Inc. and their subsidiary Davol Inc. This hernia mesh lawsuit was filed by the victim’s law firm in the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the Eastern District of Tennessee. The victim retained a local firm out of Cleveland, Tennessee. The Plaintiff asserted federal Court jurisdiction pursuant to: 28 U.S. Code § 1332 – Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs.
5/23/2020-Update- Dulex hernia mesh lawsuits are currently being litigated in a consolidated Bard / Davol State Court Proceeding in Rhode Island or in a Consolidated Bard / Davol Federal Court Proceeding in the Southern District of Ohio.
Bard Dulex hernia mesh lawsuit
In her federal court complaint, Ms. Jones asserts that the surgical mesh was implanted in her abdominal area in 2008 as part of a hernia repair procedure. The Dulex hernia mesh was infected and a surgeon removed the dulex hernia mesh in 2012 as part of a mesh revision surgical procedure. Even after the hernia mesh revision surgery, the victim needed additional surgeries as a result of dulex mesh complications and hernia mesh side affects. The Plaintiff asserted that Bard knew the dulex surgical mesh was defective and Bard should have warned the Plaintiff that the Dulex hernia mesh was defective and unreasonably dangerous.
This Bard Dulex hernia mesh lawsuit is part of an ongoing influx of hernia mesh lawsuits against Bard / Davol. These mesh lawsuits are being filed in RI State Courts as well as a Multidistrict litigation in Federal Court..
Plaintiff’s listed Davol’s adress on the summons as:
100 Crossings Boulevard
Warwick, Rhode Island 02886
The summons to the defendants stated, “A lawsuit has been filed against you. Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney, whose name and address are:”
MARTHA KAREN JONES alleged the following in her Dulex hernia mesh lawsuit:
- “A malfunction of this device can lead to nerve entrapment and damage, fistulae formation, erosion of mesh into organs, and chronic pain, as well as other chronic and debilitating conditions.” Id.
- “Upon information and belief, Defendants were aware of the high degree of complication and failure rate associated with Dulex Mesh.” Id.
- “Upon information and belief, Defendants were aware of the defects in the manufacture and design of Dulex Mesh.” Id.
- ‘Upon information and belief, Defendants were and are aware of the defects in the manufacture and design of Dulex Mesh and chose, and continue to choose, not to issue a recall of these products, including the Dulex Mesh implanted in the Plaintiff, in the face of a high degree of complication and failure rates.” Id.