More Lawsuits from Hernia Mesh Victims: Atrium Prolite and Proloop Meshes in New Litigation

Due to a growing number of hernia mesh lawsuits being filed throughout the federal court system surrounding Atrium ProLite and ProLoop implants, a motion has been filed with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML). This motion seeks to consolidate all the separate claims before one judge, allowing all pretrial proceedings to be coordinated.

These meshes are made by Atrium, a New Hampshire company being sued in state and federal courts for the C-Qur mesh which caused infections, including by our firm.

Atrium ProLoop and ProLite are types of polypropylene mesh that are used during surgical hernia repair procedures. Various lawsuits have been filed alleging that Atrium Medical failed to adequately test the products, resulting in defective designs. Consequently, Atrium ProLoop and ProLite have been subject to high failure rates and frequent complications, resulting in revision surgeries being necessary.

One of the motions filed states “Despite the abundance of scientific and medical information published in the literature relating to the dangerous properties and serious risks of polypropylene mesh, Atrium made a deliberate decision to ignore these dangers and began to aggressively promote polypropylene mesh to healthcare providers and consumers. Atrium misrepresented and concealed from Plaintiffs, their physicians and consumers, the serious risks, dangers, and defects associated with ProLite and ProLoop hernia mesh.”

In a motion for transfer filed on December 10th, 15 plaintiffs pursuing Atrium ProLite and ProLoop mesh lawsuits argued that a federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) should be established for all mounting claims. Currently, multiple almost identical cases surrounding Atrium ProLite and ProLoop implants are pending in four different U.S. District Courts. This may lead to inconsistent pretrial rulings, duplicative discovery, and a waste of judicial resources.

The plaintiffs indicated that they believe the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California is the most appropriate venue to try the case, as most of the cases are already pending in that court. In addition, the Central District of California’s course has the capacity and capability to accommodate the Atrium ProLite and ProLoop MDL.

The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation is expected to consider oral arguments surrounding the motion, including any responses filed by Atrium Medical. During a hearing early next year, the panel will decide whether a centralized management approach is appropriate at this stage of the litigation.