Skip to main content

A Lawsuit Over 3T Heater-Cooler System Revived

A Lawsuit Over 3T Heater-Cooler System Revived

Last Friday, a three-judge panel from the Third Circuit restored a lawsuit filed by a Louisiana man who alleged LivaNova’s 3T Heater-Cooler System for contracting bacterial infections during open-heart surgery.  The federal appellate panel reinstated the previously dismissed lawsuit by the Pennsylvania federal court ruling that it should not be dismissed on the basis that the plaintiff did not respond timely to a multidistrict litigation (MDL) court’s Lone Pine order.  In 2017, the plaintiff underwent heart

Introduction

Last Friday, a three-judge panel from the Third Circuit restored a lawsuit filed by a Louisiana man who alleged LivaNova’s 3T Heater-Cooler System for contracting bacterial infections during open-heart surgery.

The federal appellate panel reinstated the previously dismissed lawsuit by the Pennsylvania federal court ruling that it should not be dismissed on the basis that the plaintiff did not respond timely to a multidistrict litigation (MDL) court’s Lone Pine order.

In 2017, the plaintiff underwent heart surgery in Louisiana using a 3T device, following which he was infected and the doctors believed that it was an NTM infection. Patients who had a similar surgery using the device in the same hospital were reported to have caught the infection.

The lawsuit filed against LivaNova Holding USA Inc., earlier known as Sorin Group USA, was dismissed last year by the lower court stating that the plaintiff had no proof that he suffered from nontuberculous mycobacterium (NTM) infection, which is required as part of a case management order in the MDL.

According to the April 9 precedential opinion, the appellate panel said that the claims might be viable under the Louisiana Products Liability Act. and hence the MDL court should have allowed the transferor court to hear the case.

The panel termed the dismissal an abuse of discretion and further added that the lower court deprived the plaintiff of the opportunity to litigate his suit in any venue without consideration of how it might fare outside the MDL context.

The opinion also noted that the plaintiff might be able to make a case in Louisiana, where the lawsuit was filed initially, and the panel asked the lower court to suggest to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) to send the case to Eastern Louisiana federal court.

Comments

Restricted HTML

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a href hreflang> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote cite> <code> <ul type> <ol start type> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <h2 id> <h3 id> <h4 id> <h5 id> <h6 id>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.

Latest News

Purdue, Sacklers Agree to $7.4B Opioid Settlement

Categories: Opioids

Purdue Pharma and its owners, the Sackler family, have agreed to a $7.4 billion settlement to resolve thousands of lawsuits accusing the…

Paraquat Trials Scheduled for October 2025 & April 2026

Categories: Paraquat

A U.S. District Judge overseeing thousands of federal

UGA College of Pharmacy Gets $1M+ to Fight Opioid Crisis

Categories: Opioids

Faculty from the University of Georgia’s College of Pharmacy have been awarded a nearly $1.2 million grant from the Georgia Opioid Crisis…

Get 5 Free Medical Record Reviews – No Risk, No Contracts!      
Only 10 firms will be accepted!

Valid until February 28, 2025.