KBA Attorneys began with two nationally-recognized product liability attorneys. They worked on various pharmaceutical and medical device cases across the country for decades.
One of these founders served the medical device industry before law school, interned at FDA during law school, and litigated product liability cases for the defense and plaintiffs. He has handled every aspect of medical device cases from meeting clients initially to intake their case through trial. The other founder has experience working with experts and trying pharmaceutical and medical device cases. These medical device attorneys former a small, powerhouse medical device injury law firm, KBA Attorneys.
Their experience now combines with several attorneys who have litigated and tried medical device cases. Adding several other medical device lawyers grew the firm substantially in size and scope. Collectively we have handled dozens of medical device lawsuits. We now come together under the new name, KBD Attorneys reflecting the addition of named parnter Reza Davani, a medical device attorney now trying nursing home cases and obtaining multi million dollar verdicts for victims.
KBA Attorneys has unique real-world medical device lawyer experience that continues at KBD
One of KBA’s founding attorneys, Justin Browne, worked within FDA and served the industry for several years. After a brief stint on the defense side, he joined a premier plaintiffs’ firm where he met KBA’s second founder, Brain Ketterer. They spent years together working on medical device cases across the country.
KBA’s founding attorneys handled all aspects of medical device lawsuits from depositions of corporations, experts, and plaintiffs, to expert retention, development, and motions practice. They argued Daubert and other motions concerning the admissibility of expert testimony and the sufficiency of evidence to hold medical device and other companies liable. They helped their prior firm become renowned medical device lawyers.
At that prior firm, they met the third named partner of our law firm, Reza Davani. They mentored him on medical device cases. He went on to handle medical malpractice, premises, trucking and other motor vehicle cases, nursing home, and catastrophic injury cases at other Baltimore area law firms. The trio paired up again and formed KBD when Reza obtained multiple million dollar verdicts and became MAJ’s Maryland Trial Lawyer of the Year.
We assembled a team of several medical device attorneys to the team. Our attorneys have been litigating medical devices cases for decades. They have experience in all aspects of medical device litigation from client services, to drafting pleadings, developing expert reports, deposing witnesses, arguing motions, and trying cases.
Defective medical devices are a specific type of product liability case and our medical device attorneys are exceptionally adept at fighting for clients. All of the medical device lawyers at KBD have held leadership positions and litigated medical device lawsuits, including several leadership positions in PECs and on PSCs (that’s MDL speak for plaintiff executive and steering committee positions – the groups that actually run the litigations). Partners Robert Price and Whitney Butcher are handling many of our medical device cases now bringing decades of combined experience and results, and a client-centered approach led by associate, Keith Smith.
KBA Attorneys remain leaders in medical device lawsuits as KBD Attorneys
The defective medical device lawyer team investigates FDA medical device recalls and post market failures. Each medical device lawyer considers the legal, scientific, and medical aspects of each medical device recall. We investigate several medical device cases each year.
We have handled cases from intake to trial. KBD’s attorneys frequently speak at industry events on these topics. Other law firms refer their cases to KBD because of its experience, client responsiveness, and dedication. We pride ourselves on our ability to handle medical device cases.
KBD is looking at the following medical device cases:
- KBD is handling Cartiva toe implant cases. We are leading the fight concerning this now withdrawn product.
- KBD remains very involved in Hernia mesh cases. Some patients suffer serious injuries after hernia mesh. Many law firms across the country refer their clients to KBA. We have settled hernia mesh cases and continue litigating them.
- KBD is litigating transvaginal mesh (TVM), pelvic mesh lawsuits. This concerns vaginal mesh or transvaginal mesh, sometimes mistakenly referred to as transvaginal mesh used after vaginal mesh surgery
- KBD has litigated elbow cases.
- Bard Power Port (infections, thrombosis, stroke, death)
- Similarly, KBD litigated and has settled hip cases.
- KBD is handling other hip and knee cases, including Exactech, (including Exactech shoulders), as well as Zimmer Biomet CPT Hip System.
- KBD is investigating heart-related medical device product failures, including Impella, HeartMate II and Heartmate 3 and Defibtech RMU.
- KBD is investigating failures in the Torax LINX Device, a device that is supposed to help people with GERD (Gastro Esophageal Reflux Disease) and we are co-counseling with other firms.
- KBD is investigating Megadyne’s discontinued Pediatric Return Electrodes.
KBD handles medical device cases passionately
We are passionate about these defective medical device cases because they usually involve serious injuries to people who were simply following their doctors’ advice and trying to get better. Having worked with FDA, regulatory, biomedical, human factors, and risk management experts, we are uniquely positioned to understand industry standards, best practices, and the underlying legal, regulatory, and practical implications of medical device cases. We know the industry from sales reps to the C-Suite.
We have done well in this area of law because these cases involve complicated relationships between engineering, science, medicine, and the law, especially FDA regulations and other industry standards. Our team thrives in challenging situations because we’re empathetic, compassionate human beings, we are leaders in the law and in our communities, and we are athletes, former and current. We pick our spots and fight like hell for the goals our clients set forth for us.
What is a medical device?
A medical device is everything from crutches to an artificial hip. From FDA, “Medical devices range from simple tongue depressors and bedpans to complex programmable pacemakers with micro-chip technology and laser surgical devices.” They also include diagnostics – testing kits and things like x-rays. The statutory definition of a medical device is: an instrument, apparatus, implement, machine, contrivance, implant, in vitro reagent, or other similar or related article, including a component part, or accessory which is:
- Recognized in the official National Formulary, or the United States Pharmacopoeia, or any supplement to them.
- Intended for use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions, or in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, in man or other animals.
- Intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals, and which does not achieve its primary intended purposes through chemical action within or on the body of man or other animals and which does not achieve its primary intended purposes through chemical action within or on the body of man or other animals and which is not dependent upon being metabolized for the achievement of its primary intended purposes. The term “device” does not include software functions excluded pursuant to section 520(o).21 U.S.C. § 321(h). Each of us is exposed to many medical devices throughout our lives.
How medical devices get into patients
Patients do not get most medical devices by going to a pharmacy, although there are specialty shops that sell medical devices like prosthetics. A lot of times patients receive medical devices from their doctor or in a hospital.
The doctor or hospital gets the medical devices from a medical device company. They usually learn about the devices from company sales reps. They also hear about them at conferences and read about them in medical publications. There are thousands of medical devices, so it is a fast-paced frequently changing industry. FDA has a defined pathway to approval.
The FDA gateway: Two roads diverged
Companies can market to physicians by going through the FDA. At the Agency, they face a fork in the road. They can have FDA approve their medical device through the Premarket Approval Process (PMA). Alternatively, they can have their medical device cleared by the FDA through what we often refer to as the 510(k) process (that’s just lawyers and industry people trying to be cool by citing to that section of the law, which is the Food, Drug & Cosmetics Act).
The Pre Market Approval Process
The PMA process usually takes a lot longer because it is intended for devices that FDA does not have a lot of history about. The company has to do more extensive testing to make sure it is safe and effective. Note, the company does the testing, not the FDA. The FDA does limited testing sometimes, but very rarely; it is legally the company’s responsibility to make sure the device is safe and effective. The FDA is a check, but not a perfect one, in large part because it is impossible to fund it sufficiently to adequately evaluate the thousands of products that come before it.
The 510(k) Clearance Process
When a company goes the 510(k) route, it basically says to the FDA, our device is pretty much like some other device that already went through the PMA process, or that has been around for a long time, so we don’t need to do so much testing, we already know it’s safe and effective. Here’s how it is similar to the devices about which you’re already aware. So, please let us go market this new widget just like the company down the street gets to market its slightly different widget.
After FDA reviews the company’s paperwork regarding the device, it either approves it or clears it. The company can then sell it, which it does through advertising, sales reps, and many other methods, some of which are not always appropriate. The company can only market the device for the intended uses the FDA considered. For the most part, it cannot promote the product for “off label” uses – uses other than within the scope of its approved/cleared labeling or intended use. But essentially, after FDA approves or clears the device, it gets to physicians to use in patients.
Risk management failures that injure people
Medical devices can save and improve lives, but medical devices can also be dangerous. Medical devices can injure people in many ways from cutting organs to infections. Injuries from medical devices happen for three basic reasons:
Manufacturing defects.
Something goes wrong while the device is being made. Maybe someone spills a chemical into a vat or a machine malfunctions and the plastic on the device is made too short. A true manufacturing defect is usually limited to a number of products; it does not apply to every single device ever made. It’s simply a problem that came up with some of the devices because something went wrong; those devices were not made according to the company’s specifications.
Design defects.
People sometimes get hurt using medical devices because the medical devices were defectively designed. This affects every single product and the problem was there from the outset. The way it was conceptualized, the materials it was made with, the way it functioned, those are all ways a medical device can be defectively designed. For example, a medical device may have been made with a material that causes an allergic reaction or it may have been built in a way that causes mechanical problems and the device breaks apart once inside the body. In these kinds of cases, we are basically looking at whether the device could have been designed more safely – by adding components, using different materials, or omitting certain features.
Failure to warn, inadequate warning, or inadequate instructions.
Technically, this is a design defect too because warnings are part of labeling and labeling is part of the device design, but it is unique in several ways. Basically, we are looking at what the company knew or should have known, and what it did with the information it had – did it share the information with the people that the company knew would use the device. Often times the company was aware of risks but withheld the information, or it mentioned some information, but did not provide the whole story. Other times the device required specialized knowledge or training and the company failed to provide it.
These failures give rise to product liability or negligence claims.
From failure to injury
There are literally tens of thousands of medical devices. Doctors do not learn how to use all these devices during their medical training. Sales reps come in with the latest gadgets each week and it is the company’s responsibility to include written instructions or provide training to be sure doctors know how to use the device safety. Doctors need to know how to use the device and they rely on the company to provide the information. After all, the company knows its device best.
Medical devices can injure people if the user does not use them properly, which is often due to insufficient instructions and disclosures. A physician may have been unaware of risks from using the device with other devices or drugs. The doctor may not have known the nuances related to the implantation of the such as required surgical techniques. Often people are quick to blame the doctors, especially people at the medical device companies.
While doctors just like all of us make mistakes, it is the medical device company’s responsibility to make sure its device includes instructions or directions for how to use the product. Medical device companies are responsible for providing enough information – via labeling, instructions, or even training – to make sure the people using the device know how to use it safely. They must assess these materials before they market the device and after it is on the market. Companies must assess risks to determine if they should update the design of the device, including its labeling, based on real work results. This is their legal duty, and they can’t pass the buck.
Failure to disclose risks
Additionally, medical devices can injure people when companies fail to disclose risks associated with the product. The product may be known to break down after a couple of years or to fail under certain conditions. It may not be intended for certain populations like pregnant women or children. Companies must warn about these risks. Warnings must be understandable and designed to actually be read, understood, and followed. Again, companies cannot just blame the user – they have to show they made sure the warnings were adequate in content (what they say) and design (how they say it, for example where they are, the font size, etc.)
In addition to manufacturing and design defect cases, the lawyers at KBA also litigate design defect cases. They are very complex cases because you are basically looking back and asking, was there a better way to make this device. Then you may have to prove that design change would prevent people from getting hurt.
We have been successful in large part because of the experts we retain. These cases take a long time to resolve and cost a lot of money to do so because we have to hire engineering, medical device specialist, toxicology, medical and other experts. We, along with these experts, spend months if not years pouring through millions of pages of documents regarding the devices – from the information they shared with FDA to the complaints they received about the device after it went on the market. We depose dozens of people, including corporate officers. Unfortunately, that means our clients have to wait many years before obtaining some recovery. Trials can take months and cost half a million dollars to complete just one.
Misconceptions about Recalls
Manufacturing, design, and labeling defects are fairly rare. When they happen, there is usually a recall of a limited number of devices. More rarely, recalls involve actual market withdrawals – the company tries to get the devices back, out of hospitals and doctor’s offices, or even patients.
However, a lot of “recalls” are not recalled the way we would think of the word; the product remains on the market. They are not “withdrawn” or removed from the market. In other words, the keep selling them, albeit with different labels or a modification.
Many times the “recall” is really a change to the device’s labeling – the paperwork that comes with the device, as well as the advertising or promotional material regarding the devices. A good number of the cases we deal with have to do with these kinds of issues.
Medical Device Lawsuits – A Long Haul
The way it usually works is someone gets the word out about a problem with a medical device. FDA announces a recall, a doctor publishes an article about problems she’s seeing in her patients, or an internal company memo gets leaked to the press. The cheesy lawyer ads begin. Law firms evaluate potential claims. Lawsuits get filed around the country.
Most times the lawsuits are not class actions. A class action basically involves one or a few people litigating a case on behalf of a bunch of other similarly situated people. But those other people, the class members, never file a lawsuit and are often unknown until later in the litigation.
The people who file the lawsuit are called class reps. They stand in the shoes of everyone else and manage the litigation for everyone else, including negotiating the settlement, through their lawyers of course. The other people never file any lawsuit and are not involved in the litigation. They often do not have to participate other than submitting some proof that they had the product or used the service at issue. They choose to “opt-in” after it settles and they get a check in the mail.
By comparison, these medical device cases involve individually filed lawsuits. They are mostly product liability or negligence actions.
Each plaintiff must be involved, to varying degrees. They must settle their own lawsuits. Although they are different in terms of how they are set up, the law involved, and how attorneys litigate them, in the past couple decades, class actions and these medical devices cases have become more similar in some ways.
Defective device cases as mass torts
Plaintiffs file medical device cases in various state and federal courts around the country. Then, a group of lawyers consolidate the cases in one court or just a couple of courts to make it more efficient. They basically say, all these people were injured by the same product because the product failed in the same way; so, let’s litigate those common issues.
The common issues include whether the company designed the product defectively because there was a safer way to make it and whether the product can actually injure people if it fails. The system believes it is more efficient to resolve these common issues in one court all at the same time once rather than have the same questions and the same evidence flying around dozens of courts across the country at various different times. It is also more practical and efficient. For example, attorneys can use one expert to the benefit of thousands of plaintiffs, for example.
The usual mass tort process
In these lawsuits, the opposing sides exchange documents regarding the medical device and the patients’ medical and personal histories. They fight over those things. The attorneys depose witnesses involved with the product. They fight over those things too. Each side hires experts who say opposing things. They fight over those things. The court decides and either the case goes away forever, or it continues to trial. You can see why these things cases take years to resolve.
The Court resolves legal issues that impact all the cases. After dealing with those common issues, a group of individual plaintiffs (called bellwether cases) can present their specific case to show how the device injured them. They go before a jury to see who is most likely right.
The jury renders a verdict, and then usually, the rest of the cases settle over time. Historically, most of the time the cases settle after a couple of bellwether trials. That has been the model for decades, but it is changing.
The lawyers at KBA are actively trying to change that outdated, inefficient model. But for now, that is generally how medical device companies sometimes err and the lawyers at KBA try to help people by the device companies’ failures.
Current Medical Device Litigations
KBA is active in several medical device litigations. Our attorneys are litigating hernia mesh cases. Some patients suffer serious injuries after hernia mesh. Many law firms across the country refer their clients to KBA. We have settled hernia mesh cases and continue litigating them. KBA has litigated elbow cases. Similarly, KBA litigated and has settled hip cases.