Victims implanted with Perfix Plug hernia mesh are filing lawsuits seeking justice and compensation against the manufacturer, Bard/ Davol. Perflix Plug is a type of hernia mesh manufactured by Bard in conjunction with their subsidiary Davol. In December 2017, BD (Becton, Dickinson and Company) acquired Bard for 24 Billion. There are currently over 15,000 hernia mesh lawsuits filed against Bard / Davol in both Federal and State Courts. Many of these lawsuits against Bard are for victims implanted with Perfix Plug or Perfix Plug Light. No recall is required to file a Perfix Plug Lawsuit. We do not require a revision, repair or removal surgery to file a lawsuit. The Perfix Plug lawsuits are not part of a class action. Therefore, your lawsuit is an individual lawsuit and you have the right to your own hernia mesh lawyer. The Perfix Plug Lawsuits are part of consolidated lawsuits. Many hernia mesh victims are seeking pertinent information about PerFix Plug lawsuits.
Here are some pertinent facts about Perfix Plug lawsuits and Perfix Light Plug lawsuits:
- Perfix Plug hernia mesh is a Monofilament Knitted Polypropylene mesh.
- Bard mesh Perfix Plug and Perfix Light Plug is primarily used for hernia repair.
- This mesh has become infamous for severe hernia mesh complications, mesh infection as well as mesh rejection / failure.
- Many Perfix Plug mesh lawsuits have been filed against Bard.
- There is currently a Multidistrict Litigation (consolidated proceeding) for all Bard hernia mesh made of Polyproplene in Federal Court in the Southern District of Ohio.
- There are hundreds of Perfix Plug lawsuits pending in a Rhode Island State Court consolidated proceeding.
- PerFix Plug: The PerFix plug is pre-formed, three-dimensional device constructed of fluted outer layer of small pore, heavyweight, unsuitable polypropylene mesh and multiple inner layers of that same mesh attached at the tip, with an additional separate flat, pre—shaped onlay piece of small pore, heavyweight, unsuitable polypropylene mesh. This excessive amount 0f foreign material has been flagged in the World Guidelines for Groin Hernia Management as having high incidence of erosion and lifetime risk of migration..” MASTER LONG FORM COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND, IN RE: DAVOL/ CR. BARD HERNIA MESH MULTI—CASE MANAGEMENT
Bard PerFix Light Plug recall
Another Perfix plug, the Bard PerFix Light Plug was recalled in an FDA Class 2 device recall “The Bard PerFix Light Plug is indicated for reinforcement if soft tissue, where weakness exists, in procedures involving soft tissue repair, such as groin hernia defects” Class 2 Device Recall Bard PerFix Light Plug
PerFix Plug Lawsuit | bard mesh perfix plug
Many victims are wondering if there will be a global Perflix Plug lawsuit settlement 2020 or if any Perflix Plug lawsuits will be settled in 2020. Some aggrieved surgical mesh victims are trying to determine if the is an average settlement amount for hernia mesh lawsuits. There are no clear answer to these questions. Top hernia mesh attorneys are litigating these causes of action against Bard/ Davol seeking justice and compensation for victims.
Where will my Perfix Plug mesh lawsuit be filed?
There are three likely destinations for Perfix mesh lawsuits 2020:
- The Perfix Plug lawsuits may be filed in Federal Court in the Multidistrict Litigation (MDL -2846). Only mesh manufactured by Bard / Davol composed of Polyproplene may be part of this hernia mesh lawsuit. This MDL is located in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. The Presiding Justice is Edmund A. Sargus, Jr (Chief Judge, USDC).The MDL is known as, “IN RE: Davol, Inc./C.R. Bard, Inc., Polypropylene Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation.” As of May 15, 2020 there are 3,602 lawsuits pending in the Federal MDL against Bard / Davol. Many of these lawsuits are alleging that Perfix Plug and Perfix Plug Light are defective and unreasonably dangerous. Victims are seeking compensation as a result of numerous complications including: infection, mesh contraction, mesh migration as well as mesh failure.
- The Perfix Plug cases could also be filed in State Courts in Rhode Island. There is currently a consolidated State Court proceeding in Providence Superior Court for all mesh made of Polyproplene manufactured by Bard Davol. Rhode Island has an extended, long lasting statute of limitations for certain victims of Bard / Davol mesh such as the Perfix Plug and Perfix Plug Light. This author makes the case that Rhode Island is the best place to file a Perfix Plug lawsuit.
- Perfix plug lawsuits could also be filed as individual cases in various state Courts. Typically hernia mesh lawyers will only file huge damage cases as individual lawsuits. The reason for this is because, hernia mesh cases are very expensive to pursue individually.
Matthew Ochoa recently filed a lawsuit complaint against Defendants C.R. BARD, INC. and BARD DAVOL, INC. This lawsuit alleges in pertinent part that:
- “the Bard Defendants manufactured, promoted, distributed and sold for profit a product entitled BARD Perfix Plug Large-6/CTN Catalogue Number 0112970 GTIN 1080174106874 (“Bard Perfix Mesh”). Defendant promoted, distributed, and sold the Bard Perfix Mesh, as a product to repair hernia surgeries in the population. Defendant BARD describes the product as follows, “The Bard PerFix Plug is ideal for use in a tension-free preperitoneal repair technique. Since its introduction in 1993, it has been used in more than four million implants worldwide and has kept pace with new surgical techniques.” PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT & JURY DEMAND, Paragraph #26, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION, MATTHEW OCHOA, Plaintiff,V. C.R. BARD, INC., BARD DAVOL, INC., JOHNSON & JOHNSON, ETHICON, INC., ETHICON US, LLC, AND ETHICON ENDO-SURGERY, INC., Defendants.
- “At all times relevant hereto, the Defendant knew of the defective nature of its product and its labeling as herein set forth, yet continued to design, manufacture, market, distribute and sell its product to maximize sales and profits at the expense of the general public’s health and safety in conscious disregard for the foreseeable harm caused by this product. Defendant’s conduct exhibited such an entire want of care as to establish that its actions were a result of fraud, ill will, recklessness, gross negligence or willful and intentional disregard to the Plaintiff’s individual rights, health and well-being and hence punitive damages are appropriate.” Id.
What are the alleged defects to the Perfix Plug alleged in the Ochoa lawsuit:
“a. The material is not inert and therefore reacts to human tissues and/or other naturally
occurring human bodily contents adversely affecting patient health.
b. The mesh material harbors infections that adversely affect human tissues and
c. The mesh products migrate from the location of their implantation, adversely
affecting tissues and patient health.
d. If polypropylene, the mesh material abrades tissues adversely affecting patient
e. The pelvic mesh products regularly fail to perform the purpose of their implantation
such that the patient requires removal of the device and repeated treatment and
f. Due to their various defects, the pelvic mesh products regularly cause significant
injury to patients such that the mesh products must be removed, resulting in
g. The mesh products become embedded in human tissue over time such that if it
needs to be removed due to its various defects, the removal causes damage to the
organs and tissues, adversely affecting patient health.
h. The mesh products are defective in shape, composition, weight, physical, chemical
and mechanical properties and are inappropriately engineered.
i. The mesh products erode into other pelvic organs, tissue, muscle, nerves, and bone
adversely affecting tissues and patient health.
j. The Defendants designed and defected an unreasonable dangerous hernia mesh
k. Failed to adequately research the mesh.
l. The Defendants knew or should have known about the potential risk of infections,
allergic reactions, bowel damage and other internal injuries but withheld his
information from patients and doctors.
m. Defendants failed to properly investigate reports of problems after the hernia mesh
n. Defendants failed to warn about the risk of injury.
o. Defendants failed to promptly issue a recall after the problems were discovered.” Id.
Adverse event report:
If you are in need of legal representation contact us for a free review of your potential Perfix Plug claim. These cases will not be litigated as class actions. We are strongly opposed to class actions because individual surgical mesh victims do not have control over their case and whether they should settle. If the hernia mesh claim is accepted by a top hernia mesh law firm, the claim will be an individual lawsuit seeking justice and compensation.
|DVL0112750||MESH, PERFIX PLUG, SMALL, 1″X1.35″||2/CS|
|DVL0112750H||MESH, PERFIX PLUG, SMALL, 1″X1.35″||1 EA|
|DVL0112760CS||MESH PLUG MED -ORDR QTY 2||2/CS|
|DVL0112760H||MESH PLUG MED||1 EA|
|DVL0112950||MESH, PERFIX PLUG, SMALL, 1″X1.35″||6/CS|
|DVL0112960||MESH, PERFIX PLUG, MEDIUM, 1.3″X1.55″||6/CS|
|DVL0112970||MESH, PERFIX PLUG, LARGE, 1.6″X1.9″||6/CS|
|DVL0112980||MESH, PERFIX PLUG, XLG, 1.6″X2″||6/CS|
|DVL117080||PLUG, PERFIX, XLG 1.5X2IN||1/CS|