Nuvaring Lawsuit Cases

Nuvaring Lawsuit cases continue to be filed on behalf of women who suffered side effects related to blood clots as well as women who suffered internal injuries as a result of migration of the Nuvaring device.

Motions are already being heard in the first Nuvaring Lawsuit trials. The outcome of these first Nuvaring Lawsuit trials could impact when and if the maker of Nuvaring decides to offer Nuvaring Lawsuit settlements to women who have filed Nuvaring cases.

Is there a Nuvaring Class Action Lawsuit?

The question often arises, is there a Nuvaring Class Action Lawsuit? To the best of our knowledge there is no Nuvaring Class Action Lawsuit currently underway. There is, however, a Nuvaring Multidistrict Litigation. Class Action Lawsuits and Multdistrict Litigations are often confused as being the same thing. Although there would be similarities in a Nuvaring Class Action Lawsuit and a Nuvaring Multidistrict Litigation, the two types of mass lawsuits are not identical.

The existence of a Nuvaring Class Action Lawsuit or a Nuvaring Multidistrict Litigation does not effect any woman who has suffered an injury from the Nuvaring Birth Controls right to file an individual lawsuit. Women who wait to file their Nuvaring Lawsuit could face time limits that exist for filing any lawsuit.

If you were injured by the Nuvaring Birth Control Device, the best time to file your Nuvaring Lawsuit is now. The first step in filing a Nuvaring Case is to speak with a lawyer accepting clients for the Nuvaring Lawsuit case. You can speak with a lawyer that is accepting clients for the Nuvaring Lawsuit case by calling the toll free number on this page or by using the contact form above.

Nuvaring Lawsuit Settlements

If the maker of Nuvaring decides to offer settlements to women who have been injured by Nuvaring we will report that information at the time it is received.  In all likelihood there are still many women who suffered blood clot related injuries as well as injuries due to the migration of the Nuvaring Device that have yet to speak with a lawyer about  their case, if you are among these women we would encourage you not to wait to speak with a lawyer about  your case.

The post Nuvaring Lawsuit Cases Continue to Be Filed appeared first on Seedol.com.

Visa MasterCard Lawsuit

Learn more about your rights in proposed settlement in the Visa MasterCard Antitrust Lawsuit entitled  In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation—the Visa Mastercard interchange fee antitrust settlement. Contact us today at our toll free number or use the contact form on this page.

Although giant retailers like Walmart, Target and Best Buy have already opted-out of the Visa and Master Card Antitrust settlement, thousands of businesses that process a large volume of credit card transactions are still without proper legal representation to evaluate and protect their rights in this settlement. Any business that processes at least twenty million dollars per year (or more) in Credit Card transactions should consider whether opting-out of the Visa MasterCard settlement is in their best financial interest. The deadline for opting out is May 28, 2013 and businesses that fail to opt out by that time could stand to lose potentially millions of dollars they may be entitled to.

Furthermore, the settlement in In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 1720, allows Visa, Mastercard and every major bank to continue to do exactly what it is they have done all along: meet in secret and continue to set interchange rates as high as they want them to be.

How to Opt Out of the Visa Master Card Trust Settlement

If you are interested in discussing Opting Out of the Visa and MasterCard settlement offer and filing your own independent lawsuit on behalf of your business please contact or us today to discuss your potential case with our team of experienced Antitrust Lawyers.

The current settlement offer in the Visa MasterCard Antitrust Lawsuit is considered by many to be inherently unfair to businesses that process large amounts of Visa and Master Card Transactions. These businesses have suffered millions of dollars in damages due to the price-fixing conspiracy at Visa and Mastercard. Yet the settlement promises to pay a couple of pennies on the dollar. Massive retailers such as Walmart, Target and Best Buy obviously had no problem obtaining legal counsel to represent them. These retailers may process Visa and Master Card Transactions in the billions-of-dollars a year range. Businesses smaller than these mega-retailers that still process millions in credit card transactions have often not be able to find proper legal representation or the law firms they contacted were unwilling to accept their cases on a contingency fee basis meaning these business would have to spend a significant amount of money on legal fees to obtain representation.

Opting-Out without Paying Up Front Legal Fees

Our teams of experienced antitrust lawyers are accepting clients for the Visa Master Card Antitrust case on a contingency fee basis. This means that your business will not have to pay any upfront fees and our team only gets paid if we settle or win your case. We felt that offering this option to businesses that do not have the resources of Walmart, Target and Best Buy was the only way that many businesses could afford to have their rights protected and receive a fair settlement or jury award in this case.

If your business processed at least twenty million dollars per year between 2004 and today in Visa and Master Card Transactions, please contact us today on our toll free number or use the contact form on this page to receive a free legal consultation about protecting your rights in this case.

The post How to Opt Out of the Visa MasterCard Lawsuit Proposed Settlement appeared first on Seedol.com.

Mirena Birth Control Lawsuits

A review of a facebook page created about Mirena Birth Control Lawsuits for those who have been injured by Mirena indicates that many of those injured by Mirena have been turned away by law firms that they have contacted about representing them and filing a Mirena Lawsuit on their behalf. Many of these women have turned to American Law Partners seeking legal representation.

Filing a Mirena Lawsuit

It is  important for women  who were injured by the Merina IUD to understand that just because one law firm declines to represent them, does not mean that another law firm will not take their case. Different law firms have different criteria for client acceptance in the Merina Lawsuit case as well as most other cases.

A denial of legal representation by one law firm should not be interpreted as an indication that a Mirena Injury victim does not have a case. If one law firm has declined to represent you in your Merina Lawsuit, you should not give up as another law firm may have different criteria for client acceptance than another your Merina Lawsuit  case may be accepted even if it was denied by another law firm.

Choosing a Mirena Lawsuit Lawyer

In choosing a lawyer to file your Mirena Lawsuit, it is best to speak with law firms that are heavily involved in the Mirena  Lawsuit case. When women contact law firms that are not deeply involved in the Mirena Lawsuit, the a potentially more likely to be denied representation.

It is also important to seek representation for a law firm heavily involved in the Merina IUD Litigation because these firms are more likely to be in a position to handle your Mirena Lawsuit case more efficiency and in many cases achieve a better outcome for you than a law firm that is not heavily involved in the Merina Lawsuit.

If you were injured by the Mirena IUD and have not spoken with a lawyer about filing a Merina Lawsuit, you should do so now. There is a time limit for filing any lawsuit and this applies to Merina Lawsuits. If you have spoken with a law firm about your potential  Merina Lawsuit and you have been denied representation by that firm, you should not give up on your potential case. We encourage you to be your own advocate and be persistent in finding a law firm that will accept you case.

The post Mirena Lawsuit Plaintiffs Still Seeking Representation appeared first on Seedol.com.

Janumet Lawsuit

Janumet and Janumet XR a class of drugs used for the treatment of type-2 diabetes are the focus of a new alert published by the Food and Drug Administration, announcing their involvement in evaluating potential side effects of these medications. The potentially serious Janumet side effects may include pancreatitis and possible cancerous cellular changes in the pancreas. Victims of potentially serious Janumet XR side effects may be entitled to financial compensation by filing a Janumet lawsuit or Janumet XR Lawsuit Please call our toll-free number. Consultations with a Janumet lawyer are free.

Type-2 diabetes has been on the rise in the US for over a decade and is considered one of the greater health risks facing the American public today. Typically associated with obesity, poor diet, genetics and a sedentary lifestyle, type-2 diabetes can be managed with diet, exercise and if necessary the addition of medications.

Janumet Lawsuit and Jamumet XR Information

Many new medications for type-2 diabetes such as Janumet and Janumet XR have come on the market in recent years but if linked to potentially deadly side effects may not prove for some to be beneficial. The benefit of lowering blood glucose levels may not outweigh potential Janumet side effect risk of developing necrotizing pancreatitis. Deaths have been recorded that may be linked to Janumet suggest Janumet lawsuit claims.

If a drug manufacturer has not adequately warned the public of the potential risks of using a drug, they may be faced with defective product lawsuits such as a Janumet lawsuit. Potential victims are urged to be aware of information made available to the public and to seek the advice of a Janumet lawyer if necessary. A free consultation is available by calling our toll-free number anytime.

Janumet Side Effects

Independent, academic researchers published the findings of studies that according to the FDA alert issued on March 14, 2007 “suggest an increased risk of pancreatitis and pre-cancerous cellular changes called pancreatic duct metaplasia in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with a class of drugs called incretin mimetics”. The findings are serious enough to warrant an alert and further evaluation by the FDA of the study results. For information about the FDA alerts please visit the FDA 2 www.fda.gov.

The FDA alert published on March 14, 2013 is intended to alert healthcare professional and the public of the risks potentially associated with the use of a group if drug’s including Janumet and Janumet XR. The study findings, said the FDA “were based on examination of a small number of pancreatic tissue specimens taken from patients after they died from unspecified causes. FDA has asked the researchers to provide the methodology used to collect and study these specimens and to provide the tissue samples so the Agency can further investigate potential pancreatic toxicity associated with the incretin mimetics.”

Janumet and Janumet XR contain sitagliptin which is among a class of drugs known as dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors. However for the purposes of this alert, both drugs are being considered by the FDA as part of the evaluation of study findings and are included by the FDA in the class of drugs called incretin mimetics. Janumet is a combination of sitagliptin and metformin HCL and Janumet XR is the extended release formulation of Janumet.

It is not surprising to see the FDA’s 2013 alert about the possibility of an increased risk of Janumet side effects including pancreatitis and potential cancerous cellular changes in the pancreas with the use of Janumet and Januvia given they were already issuing similar alerts nearly 4 years ago. This latest in a long line of warnings regarding diabetes medications will possibly be followed by a resurgence of Janumet lawsuit filings.

Manufactured by Merck, the first DPP-4 inhibitor, Januvia (sitagliptin) was approved by the FDA on October 17, 2006. Janumet (sitagliptin and metformin HCL) followed soon after with approval being granted in early 2007. Within a period of a little over two years, the FDA was reporting a number of adverse events received by the agency. The alert issued on October 17, 2009 says

Eighty-eight post-marketing cases of acute pancreatitis, including two cases of hemorrhagic or necrotizing pancreatitis in patients using sitagliptin, were reported to the Agency between October 16, 2006 and February 9, 2009.

The Food and Drug administration has in place an adverse event reporting system and claims to encourage healthcare professionals and users of drugs and medical devices to report adverse event potentially associated with the use of a particular drug or medical device through use of the system. Logic dictates that if a system is in place for reporting adverse events, there would be close monitoring of the system followed by research into potentially problematic drugs and medical devices. That does not appear to the the case. Sadly, it was not the FDA that initiated follow-up research on the possibility of potentially deadly Janumet side effects mentioned in the FDA adverse event reporting system and in their 2009 Januvia/Janumet alert.

The Food and Drug Administration’s Mission Statement begins with “The FDA is responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, efficacy, and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, medical devices, our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation”. That’s a mouthful that would lead most people to believe the FDA has the best interest of the public at heart. That being the case, the next reasonable assumption to make is the FDA quickly pulls potentially dangerous drugs from the market, protecting the public by allowing for time for more testing of the safety of the medications pumped into the collective body of Americans.

Billions upon billions of dollars are poured into the coffers of the drug and medical device manufacturers by those individuals trusting of the system. Is that trust deserved? Very few, if any, people in this country go throughout their lives untouched by pharmaceuticals. It is not uncommon to hear someone say they prefer not taking medications. Have they considered the chemicals they ingest every day in the food they eat? Those chemicals of course have nothing directly to do with Januvia and Janumet but by stepping back a bit from the situation, one might come to some interesting conclusions about our role in funding the drug manufacturers’ ongoing business of making small fortunes.

Why would someone seek the advice of a Janumet lawyer or consider filing a Janumet lawsuit or Janumet XR Lawsuit? Simply stated, is their right. If you have suffered potential injury and believe it may have been caused by Janumet or Janumet XR, you have every right to seek advice from a Janumet lawyer. If you have suffered injury and that injury may have been caused by Janumet or Janumet XR, you may be entitled to financial compensation. It is your legal right to know your options. You along with the assistance of a Janumet lawyer are the only one that can protect any legal rights you may have. Please call today for a free case evaluation with a knowledgeable Janumet lawsuit lawyer.

Is There a Janumet Class Action Lawsuit?

To the best of our knowledge no Janumet Class Action Lawsuit or Jamunmet XR Class Action Lawsuit have been formed at this time. It is more likely that a Janumet Lawsuit and Jamumet XR Lawsuit Multidistrict Litigation may be formed than a Janumet Class Action Lawsuit or Janumet XR Class Action Lawsuit.

It is important to note that it is not necessary for any individual who has been injured by Janumet to wait for a Class Action Lawsuit or a Multidistrict Litigation to be formed to file a lawsuit. There are time limits for filing any lawsuit. If you have cause to file a Janumet Lawsuit it can be filed as an individual lawsuit and later added to a Class Action Lawsuit or Multidistrict Litigation in the event that either of these types of mass litigation are formed.

Resource Links:

http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/PostmarketDrugSafetyInformationforPatientsandProviders/ucm183768.htm

http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/2006/ucm108770.htm

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2007/022044TOC.cfm

The post Janumet Lawsuit and Janumet XR Lawsuit Information and News appeared first on Seedol.com.

Janumet

Janumet, manufactured by Merck Pharmaceuticals is medication used in combination with diet and exercise to treat type-2 diabetes. Janumet is an oral medication that is a combination of 2 active ingredients sitagliptin and metformin. Janumet, Januvia and Janumet XR all manufactured by Merck contain sitagliptin, one of the several diabetes medications potentially linked to serious side effects including cancer of the pancreas and pancreatitis. Janumet lawsuit cases are expected to emerge.

Sitagliptin a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor was first released by Merck under the brand name Januvia. The Food and Drug Administration announced approval on October 17, 2006. Janumet, a combination of sitagliptin and metformin obtained approval on March 30, 2007. An extended release formulation Janumet XR was recently approved amidst allegations of a potential association to pancreatic cancer and pancreatitis, thyroid cancer and possible renal failure. Merck announced approval of Janumet XR on February 2, 2012.

Potential Janumet Side Effects and Warnings

Sitagliptin has been beset with an onslaught of warnings of potentially serious Janumet side effects. In fact, the concerns began long before the extended release formulation was approved by the FDA. In 2008 the FDA approved label changes that would include warnings for hypersensitivity reactions that include anaphylaxis, a potentially deadly emergent allergic reaction. The warnings also include other hypersensitivity reactions including angioedema and Stevens-Johnson syndrome that had been reported as had been seen in post market experience.

On September 25, 2009, the Food and Drug Administration published notice of their revisions to prescribing information. The FDA made the following statement

Eighty-eight post-marketing cases of acute pancreatitis, including two cases of hemorrhagic or necrotizing pancreatitis in patients using sitagliptin, were reported to the Agency between October 16, 2006 and February 9, 2009.

That was 2009. Warnings were updated and strengthened but the FDA did not issue a Janumet recall but instead chose to approve the extended release formulation in 2012.

The ingredient that appears to be the culprit at the root of all the warnings is the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, sitagliptin but what does it do? To understand how sitagliptin works in the treatment of type-2 diabetes, we need to touch briefly on how the body maintains a proper level of glucose in the blood.

Glucose, a sugar is fuel. When we ingest certain foods, they are broken down to produce glucose. It is then used by the body to ultimately produce adenosine triphosphate (ADP) the body’s primary energy molecule. Too much glucose (hyperglycemia) or too little glucose (hypoglycemia) in the blood can be problematic. Different organs work efficiently together to use or store the energy we consume. If we ingest more fuel/energy (calories) than we need, energy is stored for later use. Repeated over consumption causes weight gain which if not addressed can progress to obesity and eventually morbid o obesity. Poor dietary habits, sedentary lifestyle choices and obesity are all linked to onset of diabetes, a rapidly growing problem in the US.

When we eat, the body goes to work utilizing the food. In a healthy human, an increase in blood glucose levels triggers the production of incretins. Incretins are produced by the endogenous cells of the intestinal epithelium. Incretins stimulate the production of insulin, a hormone produced by the islets of Langerhans, clusters of beta cells found in the pancreas. Insulin regulates glucose metabolism. Once incretins are released they are quickly destroyed by dipeptidyl peptidase-4. The release and almost immediate destruction of incretins prevent in a non-diabetic, the glucose levels in the blood from becoming too low.

In an individual with type-2 diabetes, rapid destruction of incretins is not an optimal event. Diabetics often lack enough incretins and concomitantly, do not produce enough insulin. Enter sitagliptin. Sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor behaves as the name implies. It inhibits the ability of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 to function. By inhibiting the ability of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 to catalyze the breakdown of incretins, they remain in the blood longer so continue to stimulate the production of insulin.

Januvia’s sole active ingredient is sitagliptin which in some cases is not enough. A frequent drug of choice for the treatment of type-2 diabetes is metformin an oral medication the works by reducing the amount of glucose absorbed by the body. Janumet offers the convenience of combining the two ingredients into one drug. Janumet XR, the extended release formulation, goes a step further by reducing the number of doses required each day. Most all Americans are looking for convenience so what could be better than one drug, one dose daily? Safety, perhaps? How safe is Janumet? Investigations into the safety and potential Janumet side effects continue, as do sales.

Treatment of type-2 diabetes is a multi-billion dollar business. The business of diabetes is growing every bit as rapidly as is the epidemic of obesity and diabetes that threatens this country. Onset of type-2 diabetes sets the victim in motion to manage the disease. Changes in lifestyle must be made. Choices become more critical than ever before. Some people can manage their type-2 diabetes with diet and exercise alone but it calls for constant and persistent determination. Many people just can’t break old habits, no matter how potentially deadly. If diet and exercise don’t work regardless of the reason, medications must be added. In addition to Janumet, Januvia and Janumet XR, there are countless other diabetes medications on the market, all promising something.

Diabetes is not a common cold. It is a serious illness. It is chronic, progressive and currently, incurable. The disease can be managed, slowing progression significantly. The end result of uncontrolled diabetes can include diabetic neuropathy, renal failure, blindness and death.

Medications can improve the lives of people all over the world. Drugs have improved and even saved millions of lives. There is no doubt pharmaceuticals are necessary but are the necessary evil? The public is at the mercy of the drug manufacturers to research, adequately test and correctly report test results of new medications to the Food and Drug Administration when seeking approval to release a new medication to the public. The pharmaceutical companies must keep an eye on their bottom-line and the pleasure of their stock holders. Does this duality represent an insurmountable conflict of interest?

Reportedly, one of the two active ingredients found in Janumet sitagliptin, has been linked to several potentially serious side effects. Janumet side effects may include and increased risk for pancreatic cancer, cancer of the thyroid, angioedema and pancreatitis, including necrotizing and hemorrhagic pancreatitis. Tracy Staton of Fierce Pharma reported February 26, 2013 on a study published in JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association). According to Ms. Staton, the study suggests the risk of developing pancreatitis when using Janumet is double that of non-users. Merck reportedly gave a statement to Bloomberg that says “”no compelling evidence of a causal relationship” between Januvia and pancreatitis or pancreatic cancer.”

Sales of Januvia and Janumet reportedly netted Merck over $5 billion dollars in 2012. Some of those billions may eventually be earmarked for any potential Janumet lawsuit cases that will no doubt crop up.

Resource Links:

http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/januvia-byetta-double-pancreatitis-risk-jama-analysis-finds/2013-02-26#ixzz2PL8IKHIa

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20456211

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2007/022044TOC.cfm

http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/2006/ucm108770.htm

http://www.diabetes.org/living-with-diabetes/treatment-and-care/medication/insulin/insulin-basics.html

http://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/SafetyInformation/ucm196610.htm

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2007/022044TOC.cfm

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/202270s002lbl.pdf

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20120202006553/en/FDA-Approves-JANUMET%C2%AE-XR-sitagliptin-metformin-HCl

The post Jamumet XR and Janumet Lawsuit and Side Effects Info appeared first on Seedol.com.

Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit Info

Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit Update:  Canadian woman stages a vaginal mesh demonstration from her wheelchair. A Winnipeg news report published on March 11, 2013 includes video of Christine Asprey participating in a protest outside the Manitoba Legislative Building. Her participation in the demonstration is according to the CVT News, done in the hopes “other women will heed her advice and not get the vaginal mesh”.

Christine Asprey had a hysterectomy in January of 2012 and during the procedure had a vaginal mesh implant inserted. She now claims it has destroyed her life. She is trying to raise enough money to travel to California to get the vaginal mesh removed, a surgery  she says is not available to her in Manitoba.

Ms. Asprey’s hysterectomy including the Vaginal mesh implant was performed at the Health Sciences Centre and was reportedly paid for by the Manitoba Province. She claims the surgery has caused her both physical and emotional pain and that if she could go back in time, she would not have had the vaginal mesh implant. Ms. Asprey’s alleged vaginal mesh side effects include chronic pain and difficulty standing or walking. According to CTV News Ms. Asprey claims she is not able to stand or walk and must depend on family for assistance.

Vaginal mesh implants are believed by some surgeons to offer additional support to vaginal and abdominal tissue. Vaginal mesh implants are used to treat stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP). The products are derived from abdominal surgical mesh which has been used by surgeons for over 40 years.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in July 2011 issued a report about vaginal mesh and the numerous reports of adverse events they had received.  Say’s the FDA “A search of the FDA’s Manufacturer and User Device Experience (MAUDE) database from the last 3 years (January 1, 2008 -December 31, 2010), identified 2,874 Medical Device Reports (MDRs) for urogynecologic surgical meshes, including reports of injury, death, and malfunctions. Among the 2,874 reports, 1,503 were associated with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repairs, and 1,371 were associated with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) repairs.”

In February, 2013 a jury for a vaginal mesh lawsuit trial in a New Jersey Federal Court awarded a plaintiff over $10 million dollars. The total award quoted includes damages as well as punitives. The plaintiff, a 47 year old former nurse hired a vaginal mesh lawyer to file a vaginal mesh lawsuit. The vaginal mesh side effects alleged in that vaginal mesh lawsuit are reportedly similar to Ms. Asprey’s and many other women.
http://winnipeg.ctvnews.ca/manitoba-woman-wants-vaginal-mesh-removed-1.1191606#ixzz2OIZgC3fq

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/medicaldevices/safety/alertsandnotices/UCM262760.pdf

http://winnipeg.ctvnews.ca/manitoba-woman-wants-vaginal-mesh-removed-1.1191606

The post Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit- Woman Stages Demonstration From Wheel Chair appeared first on Seedol.com.

Byetta Lawsuit Report

Byetta Lawsuits filed over side effects:  Use of Byetta may double the risk for developing pancreatitis says JAMA (Journal for the America Medical Association). A study report recently published by JAMA suggests the increased risk for pancreatitis may be twice has high when using Byetta than when not. Pancreatitis and inflammation of the pancreatitis can have potentially serious complications and can lead to death.

As quoted in the JAMA Internal Medicine, the prevalence of Type II Diabetes Mellitus is approaching 100 million.  Not surprisingly, the market for drug treatment of this disease is worth more than $20 billion per year.  Byetta is manufactured by Amylin Pharmaceuticals is reportedly the subject of numerous Byetta lawsuits.

Byetta Side Effects

A United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) update in August 2008 stated they had received reports of six cases of hemorrhagic or necrotizing pancreatitis in patients who were taking Byetta.  Out of these six patients, all patients required hospitalization, two of them died and the remaining four were recovering.  The Byetta was discontinued in all cases.  Recommendations from the FDA include healthcare providers being vigilant for the symptoms of acute pancreatitis.  These symptoms include persistent severe abdominal pain that can radiate to the back and could go along with nausea and vomiting.

Consumer Reports adds their input: According to Consumer Reports Online, individuals at John Hopkins in Baltimore examined over 1,000 medical records of patients with Type II Diabetes who utilized at least one prescription for any diabetes drug over a three year period of time.  The researchers found 87 of the patients who developed pancreatitis were taking Byetta or Januvia.  Concerns over these types of medications, including Byetta, highlight the value of the older type of diabetes drugs.  Reportedly, this new generation of diabetes medication is not only more expensive, but no more effective than the traditional drugs, and they are associated with an increased risk of Byetta Side Effects such as pancreatitis or inflamed pancreas according to a study in the JAMA Internal Medicine.

Adding to Byetta Side Effects, the FDA in November 2009 notified healthcare professions of more revisions to Byetta’s prescribing information.  It reports altered kidney function, including acute renal failure and insufficiency.  From 2005 through 2008, the FDA received notifications of 78 cases of altered kidney function, including 62 cases of acute renal failure and 16 cases of renal insufficiency in diabetic patients using Byetta.  Their recommendations to healthcare providers consist of careful monitoring for the development of kidney dysfunction and to reevaluate the need for Byetta if kidney issues are suspected.

What can you do if you are one of the many diabetics who have been harmed by Byetta?  Start by getting in touch with a Byetta Lawyer right away.  They will assess your case and help protect your legal rights. Therefore, if you have been diagnosed with pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer or renal complications, seeking a potential Byetta Lawsuit could help with your medical costs and loss of wages.

See also Januvia Lawsuit

The post Byetta Lawsuit resulting from side effects including severe pancreatic problems appeared first on Seedol.com.

Actos Lawsuit Update

Actos lawsuit filed on behalf of bladder cancer victim. According to Bloomberg News, Takeda Pharmaceutical, the maker of Actos (pioglitazone) , is contending with its first Actos Lawsuit case alleging its diabetes medication can cause cancer.  The plaintiff, Jack Cooper, took Actos for two years before his diagnosis of Actos bladder cancer in November 2011.  He filed his case in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles, alleging Takeda failed to provide adequate warnings regarding risks associated with long term use of the diabetes medication.

Actos Lawsuit

Mr. Cooper’s Actos Lawsuit began on February 19, 2013.  Action comes a month after Japan based Takeda won United States regulatory approval for a new diabetes drug to replace Actos.  Actos was once the world’s largest selling diabetes drug.

Takeda is facing more than 3,000 lawsuits claiming possible Actos bladder cancer or other ailments among patients as stated in court records.  Mr. Cooper’s Actos Lawsuit is among others assembled before Judge Kenneth Freeman in California.  Other cases are in State court in Illinois according to court dockets.  In addition, more than 1,200 suits have been consolidated before a Federal Judge in Louisiana for pretrial information exchanges.   According to court filings, the first Federal Actos lawsuit case is set to begin in November 2014.

Back in June of 2011, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) informed the public through a safety announcement that using the diabetes medication Actos for more than one year could be associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer.  This was based on the FDA’s review of data from a ten year epidemiological study.  The study showed an increased risk was noted among patients with the longest exposure to Actos and those exposed to the highest cumulative dose.  The FDA also became aware of an epidemiological study conducted in France suggesting an increased risk of bladder cancer linked to the drug.  Because of this study, France suspended the use of pioglitazone and Germany recommended not starting pioglitazone in new patients.

With hundreds of Actos Lawsuit claims pending in both state and federal courts filed by patients who were potentially injured by possible Actos Side Effects,  those potentially  harmed by the diabetes medication are being urged to locate an experienced Actos Lawyer who understands complex pharmaceutical litigation.

The post Actos Lawsuit filed due to Bladder Cancer appeared first on Seedol.com.

Yaz Lawsuit Update

Bayer’s pockets opened wider for more Yaz Lawsuit and Yasmin Lawsuit settlements. Bayer began offering to pay Yaz settlements and Yasmin Lawsuit  settlements in 2012.  To date, Yaz Lawsuit cases have been focused on serious blood clot injuries including some claims of blood clot related Yaz deaths.  Today Thompson Reuters News and Insights reported Bayer has agreed to Yaz lawsuit settlements involving gallbladder injuries and/or gallbladder disease. The caveats, like the drug, may make for additional potentially nasty Yaz side effects.

Bayer has agreed to pay over a billion dollars for Yaz lawsuit settlements involving blood clot injuries. Yaz settlements for blood clots have averaged over $200,000.00 and are taken on contingency with the Yaz lawyer getting paid only if/after the case is won or settles. For women suffering possible Yaz gallbladder injury reportedly, the agreed upon amounts are much, much less.

A Yaz lawsuit is taken on contingency meaning potential victims of Yaz blood clot injury have access to a Yaz lawyer and to the justice system without needing to pay money up front. A Yaz lawyer must use and risk their own resources to pursue a claim. Many Yaz lawsuit cases claiming blood clot injury have already resulted in a significant Yaz settlement. Women that have suffered Yaz blood clots are urged to seek the advice of a Yaz lawyer but that may not turn out to be the case for suffers of potential gallbladder injury.

Bayer’s agreement to entertain Yaz settlements for gallbladder injury is fraught with potential difficulty for women that did not have a potential Yaz blood clot but instead had their gallbladder removed say some Yaz lawyers.

Bayer, reportedly citing lack of evidence Yaz or Yasmin cause gallbladder injury, Bayer placed significant caps on the settlements. The total amount allotted, say’s the article in Reuters, is 24 million, a much lower number than that set aside for Yaz lawsuit cases for Yaz potential Yaz blood clot injury. It has been estimated that gallbladder settlements will range between $2000 and $3000 dollars, depending on degree of injury and number of cases filed.

Bayer reportedly offered to the latest in Yaz settlement agreements to avoid litigation but continues to deny any culpability for any injuries alleged in Yaz lawsuit cases. The bottom-line literally, is yes, Bayer has now agreed to pay Yaz settlements for gallbladder injury but will the potential victims have difficulty finding a pathway to payment? Fortunately, women that may have suffered potentially deadly Yaz blood clot injury have more potential for hope of possible financial compensation.

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/gallbladderdiseases.html

The post Yaz Lawsuit and Yasmin Lawsuit Settlements Update appeared first on Seedol.com.

Nuvaring Lawsuit Ruling

A Recent Nuvaring lawsuit ruling may favor plaintiffs. A recent ruling by a U.S. Federal District Judge Rodney Sippel may work on the side of plaintiffs who have filed Nuvaring Lawsuits against the manufacturer, Organon USA, for failure to warn about blood clot risks and other medical complications.  The ruling stated that documents formerly concealed must be made public.  Nuvaring lawyers for the plaintiffs are optimistic about this Nuvaring lawsuit ruling.

In New Jersey, Court Judge Brian R. Martinotti also handed down an order giving the public access to certain documents that the manufacturer tried to keep off the record.  Reportedly, one such document was by a pharmacologist, Shelley Ann Tischkau, Ph.D. stating Organon tested Nuvaring on sixteen women to check the level of estrogen in their blood.  Two had levels so high they were dropped from the study and this information was never revealed.  Also, she goes on to suggest that the level of estrogen released by Nuvaring can include “estrogen bursts” and not a continual low dose as first described.

What is Nuvaring?  It is a contraceptive device purported to have the same effectiveness as the birth control pill with lower and more consistent systemic estrogen exposure.  An ad for Nuvaring put emphasis on the fact the vaginal ring contains a lower hormone dose than most oral birth control.  However, the dose of hormone in Nuvaring is absorbed directly into the blood where the pills dissolve in the digestive tract.

Reportedly, the manufacturer never did any studies regarding whether Nuvaring’s method is any riskier than using oral contraceptives.  Currently, Nuvaring Lawyers are reviewing potential lawsuits on behalf of users who suffered Nuvaring Side Effects such as thrombotic events.  The manufacturer and related companies are being sued for not accurately explaining the risk of Nuvaring such as the higher level of hormone transference.

In considering whether to use this form of birth control, women should be aware of the Nuvaring Side Effects such as blood clots.  They are very serious and can be fatal.  Deep vein thrombosis is a blood clot predominantly found in the legs.  If one of these clots breaks free and travels to the lungs, a very serious life threatening event called a pulmonary embolism can occur.  If you or someone you love has been injured, contact a Nuvaring Lawyer for a free evaluation of your case.  You could be eligible for a Nuvaring Settlement to cover medical expenses, loss of wages and more.

The post A recent Nuvaring Lawsuit Ruling may favor Plaintiffs appeared first on Seedol.com.

Incivek Lawsuits

The number of individuals who may file Incivek Lawsuits may be higher than initially expected. An Incivek Class Action Lawsuit could result.  Given that Incivek has only been on the market since 2011, many lawyers Investigating Incivek Lawsuit cases believed that the number of individuals who had experienced severe side effects may have been low. From the number of case review requests we have received as well as information from other lawyers accepting Incivek Cases, we now believe that the number of potential Incivek Lawsuits that may be filed is greater than originally anticipated.

Incivek Side Effects are Potentially Fatal

The Incivek Side Effects which Incivek Lawsuits are based on can be potentially fatal. Stevens Johnson Syndrome and other Incivek side effects result in skin conditions that can be life threatening in many cases. The skin is the largest organ of the human body.

In general, most people do not think of a skin condition as being potentially life threatening however, there are numerous skin conditions that can in fact be deadly.  Incivek has been linked to more than one potentially deadly skin disorder.

Will there be an Incivek Class Action Lawsuit?

It is too early to predict if there will be an Incivek Class Action Lawsuit. It is just as likely that there will be an Incivek Multidistrict Litigation as a Incivek Class Action Lawsuit. Although Class Action Lawsuit and Multidistrict Litigations have much in common, Multidistrict Litigation’s are often more common in cases involving drugs that Class Action Lawsuits.

Individual Incivek Lawsuits can be filed regardless of whether an Incivek Class Action Lawsuit or an Incivek Multidistrict Litigation is formed. A mass litigation does not have to occur for any individual injured by Incivek to file an Incivek Lawsuit.

Anyone who was administer Incivek and experienced a severe side effect should not wait to see if an Incivek Class Action Lawsuit is formed before consulting with an attorney. There is a time limit for filing an Incivek Lawsuit or any other lawsuit.

Incivek Lawsuit Reference Link

http://www.jbenj.com/incivek-lawsuit-likely-due-to-link-to-stevens-johnson-syndrome-and-severe-skin-rashes/

The post Incivek Lawsuit could become an Incivek Class Action Lawsuit appeared first on Seedol.com.

Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit Report

The first  Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits have already been tried and to the best of our knowledge, the plaintiffs have won in all cases to date. Vaginal Mesh Class Action Lawsuits, or MDLs, are currently underway.  Verdicts have been handed down awarding those injured by Vaginal Mesh products with multimillion dollar monetary awards.

Although the first Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit trials have already occurred and numerous Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits are still outstanding, we believe many more Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits will be filed. A Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit does not become necessary until a woman who has had a Vaginal Mesh Implant actually has a problem with her Vaginal Mesh Product.

Given that Vaginal Mesh Implants are meant to be permanent, an implant can be in place for years before it becomes problematic and injures the woman. Many women who have vaginal mesh implants feel like they have a ticking time bomb inside them waiting to go off.

Vaginal Mesh Class Action Lawsuit 

There are several Vaginal Mesh Multidistrict Litigations currently underway. These group litigations are often referred to as a Vaginal Mesh Class Action Lawsuit due to the fact that most people are more familiar with the term Class Action Lawsuit than the term Multidistrict Litigation.

A Vaginal Mesh Multidistrict Litigation is similar to a Vaginal Mesh Class Action Lawsuit in many ways however, the two types of group litigation are not identical. Individual Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits may also be filed separately from the Multidistrict Litigations ongoing.

Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit Settlements

The Multimillion dollar verdicts handed down in the first Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit trials could lead some Vaginal Mesh Implant makers currently facing lawsuits to offer settlements.  As of yet we are unaware of any Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit manufacturer electing to begin offering Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit settlements however, this does not mean that any of these manufacturers of Vaginal Mesh products may not decide to being offering Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit Settlements in the near future.

The prospect of facing a large number of Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit trials could be sufficient incentive for Vaginal Mesh manufacturers to conclude that they would be better served offering Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit Settlements, than facing the expense of a large number of trials in which juries may continue to hand down multimillion dollar awards to the women who have been injured by their products.

The post Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit Likely to Continue far beyond 2013 appeared first on Seedol.com.

Granuflo Dialysis Lawsuit Report

The Granuflo Dialysis Lawsuit, often simply referred to as the Dialysis Lawsuit or Granuflo Lawsuit, could end up being formed into a Dialysis Class Action Lawsuit. The case also involves Naturalyte, another drug made by Fresenius Medical Care for the same purpose Granuflo is used for.

The volume of Dialysis Lawsuit cases over Granuflo and Naturalyte is expected to be higher than initially expected. Granuflo and Naturalyte were used at Fresenius Clinics across the United States as well dialysis clinics not owned by Fresenius. As of our last conversation with the Compliance division of the FDA investigating the Fresenius Case, the FDA could not identify all of the dialysis clinics that may have administered Granuflo and Naturalyte. When directly ask if the FDA could confirm that Fresenius was now in compliance with FDA directives aimed at preventing future heart attacks and strokes due to Granuflo and Naturalyte, the FDA could not confirm that Fresenius was now in compliance.

Granuflo Dialysis Class Action Lawsuit

A Dialysis Class Action Lawsuit could be formed. If a Granuflo Dialysis Class Action Lawsuit is formed it will more than likely be a Dialysis Lawsuit Multidistrict Litigation. Class Action Lawsuits and Multidistrict Litigations have much in common however they are not identical.

It is not necessary that a Granuflo Dialysis Class Action Lawsuit be formed for individuals who were injured by Granuflo to file Granuflo Dialysis Lawsuits. A Granuflo Dialysis Class Action Lawsuit or Multi District Litigation would give individuals the ability to add their case to a mass action with other plaintiffs. Adding an individual case to a Granuflo Class Action Lawsuit would not be required. It is also not necessary that a Dialysis Class Action  Lawsuit be formed in order for any individual to file a Dialysis Lawsuit if the suffered a heart attack or stroke within a few days of having underwent a dialysis treatment in which Granuflo was administered.

Challenges in the Dialysis Lawsuit

One of the challenges lawyers face who are representing Dialysis Lawsuit clients is establishing whether or not their clients were administered Granuflo or Naurallyte. Unlike with other drugs, someone administered Granuflo or Naturalyte may not be aware that they are being administered the drug. This is something that lawyers working on the Granuflo Dialysis Lawsuit will have to establish by obtaining the medical records of individual plaintiffs, which can be done by obtaining the medical records for that individual patient.

The full scope of the Granuflo Dialysis Lawsuit may not be known for some time. In the interim, lawyers representing those injured by Granuflo or Naturalyte will continue to investigate dialysis lawsuit cases and file lawsuits on behalf of those injured.

The post Granuflo Dialysis Lawsuit and Dialysis Lawsuit Class Action Info appeared first on Seedol.com.

Mirena Lawsuit Report

More Mirena Lawsuits continue to be filed as women come forward who have been injured by the Mirena as a Mirena Class Action Lawsuit develops. The Mirena Lawsuit cases being filed over complications from the Mirena IUD differ in significant ways from most of the other birth control lawsuits that are currently being filed.

Birth Control Lawsuit such as the Mirena Case were among the most often filed lawsuits against drug and medical device makers in 2012. We expect that trend to continue into 2013. In addition to the birth control lawsuits which were filed in 2012, Vaginal Mesh or Bladder Sling Lawsuits were also filed in large numbers. All of these cases are similar in that they involve the female reproductive system to one extent or another. Although the cases filed over Birth Control products and Transvaginal Mesh Products have similarities, the cases are unique in as many ways as they are similar.

Mirena Class Action Lawsuit Update

A hearing is set for later this month to determine whether or not a Mirena Multidistrict Litigation will be formed. The Mirena Lawsuit Multidistrict Litigation is often referred to as the Mirena Class Action Lawsuit, although the two types of litigation do differ.

New independent Mirena Lawsuit cases continue to be filed across the United States. Most of these Mirena Lawsuit cases are being filed as a result of injuries sustained when the Mirena IUD moves from the position where it is implanted. All or part of the Mirena IUD can move to other parts of the woman’s reproductive system and even beyond. The device or parts of the Mirena IUD device can cause punctures, tears and blockages in organs and other tissues. These punctures tears and blockages can lead to infection as well as a number of other complications. Some of the complications from the Mirena IUD can be fatal.

Mirena Lawsuit Resource Link

http://www.jbenj.com/mirena

The post Mirena Lawsuit Report, Hearing for Mirena Class Action Lawsuit appeared first on Seedol.com.

Januvia Lawsuit Report

Lawyers are already investigating Januvia Lawsuits behalf of individuals who have suffered from severe side effects from Januvia. A report just released by the FDA in which they indicated that they are reviewing a study which links Januvia and other similar diabetes drugs to sever pancreatic conditions is likely to increase the number of Januvia Lawsuits being filed on behalf of individuals who were prescribed Januvia and suffered from severe side effects, some of which were fatal.

The information released by the FDA was not the first information that has been made public linking Januvia and other diabetes drugs to side effects, including Pancreatic conditions which can be fatal. The study being reviewed by the FDA was the result of a number of deaths due to pancreatic conditions linked to Januvia and other diabetes drugs.

Januvia Side Effects News

The link between potentially fatal pancreatic conditions related to Januvia Side Effect is not new. There have been indications of a link between Januvia and potentially fatal side effects related to pancreatic conditions previously. The FDA has issued information on the link between Januvia and potentially fatal side effects before however, no action has been taken to issue an FDA Januvia Recall.

Other side effects linked to Januvia include serious kidney complications as well as numerous other less serious Januvia Side Effect. What action the FDA may take after reviewing the current studies cannot be predicted with any accuracy at this time.

Is there a Januvia Class Action Lawsuit?

To the best of our knowledge, there has been no effort made at this time to form a Januvia Class Action Lawsuit, although this could change at any time. It is important for Januvia Side Effects victims to be aware that they may file an independent Januvia Lawsuit, regardless of whether a Januvia Class Action Lawsuit occurs or not.

The formation of a Januvia Class Action Lawsuit would give Januvia Lawsuit plaintiffs the option of joining their case in the Januvia Class Action, however it would not be mandatory that any person with an existing Januvia Lawsuit case add their case to a Januvia Class Action Lawsuit.

The post Januvia Lawsuit Breaking News Related to FDA Report appeared first on Seedol.com.