State and federal courts overseeing Stryker hip lawsuits filed in connection with allegedly defective LFIT CoCr V40 Femoral Heads have ordered plaintiffs to submit Fact Sheets for all pending cases, as well as any filed or transferred to the respective litigations in the future.
According to an Order dated October 31, 2017, those who have cases pending in the multicounty litigation now underway in New Jersey’s Bergen County Superior Court must each submit a Plaintiff Fact Sheet no later than 60 days from the date of the Order. Future plaintiffs must do so within 60 days of their case’s filing or transfer to the proceeding.
Plaintiffs who have Stryker hip lawsuits pending in the multidistrict litigation now underway in the U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts, are to submit their Fact Sheets within 60 days of the Court’s November 13th Order. Future plaintiffs must do the same within 60 days of their case’s transfer or filing.
The use of a Plaintiff Fact Sheet in the federal and state Stryker hip litigations will allow plaintiffs an efficient means of providing the Court with case-specific details about the injuries and complications they have allegedly experienced since implantation of their LFIT V40 components
Stryker’s LFIT CoCr V40 Femoral Heads are designed to be used with several of the company’s modular hip stems, including Accolade, ABG II, Citation TMZF HA, Exeter V40, Hipstar, Meridian PA, Rejuvenate, Reliance PF, and Restoration.
Certain LFIT V40 femoral heads manufactured before September 2011 were recalled last year, after they were found to suffer from higher-than-expected rates of taper lock failure. Patients who have received these recalled hip components may be at risk for:
The U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) designated Stryker’s action a Class II recall, which indicates that the affected devices could cause temporary or medically reversible health effects.
Plaintiffs who have filed Stryker hip lawsuits in connection with the LFIT V40 femoral head recall assert that the device was not properly tested before being brought to market. They also claim that Stryker was aware that the product’s premature failure rate made LFIT V40 femoral heads more dangerous than similar components, yet continued to market the device as a perfect fit for younger, more active patients.
Finally, Stryker is accused of failing to provide doctors and patients with adequate warnings about the risks allegedly associates with LFIT V40 femoral heads.