|Request a Document|
|Search Within Briefcase|
There have been two important developments in the Xarelto Litigation, one in the Federal Litigation before Judge Eldon Fallon and the other in the Philadelphia court of Common Pleas before Judge Arnold New.
In Xarelto Litigation Federal MDL 2592, on March 21st, Judge Eldon Fallon issued Pretrial Order No. 11E.
PTO 11E sets a deadline for filing bundled complaints in MDL 2592 as well as filing Short Form Complaints. The deadline set by Judge Fallon is May 20th 2016. This order does not prevent claims from being filed in MDL 2592 after May 20th however, for each complaint filed after May 20th the firm filing the complaint will need to pay the full filing fee for each claim filed and will no longer be able to file multiple claims for a single filing fee.
Firms filing after the May 20th deadline will also no longer be able to file a short from complaint. Complaints filed after May 20th must be filed in accordance with FRCP and Local Court Rules.
This order will be in effect until such time as Judge Fallon may elect to amend the order. In that Judge Fallon has often expressed a displeasure with firms holding cases which are ripe for filing, preventing him from having a clear picture of the number of potential cases in the Universe of an MDL before him, it is unlikely that he will amend this order.
Xarelto MDL 2592 PTO 11E also sets the same May 20th deadline for filing Short Form Complaints in the Xarelto MDL before Judge Fallon. After May 20th, attorneys filing cases in the MDL will be required to file “Long Form”, in the manner a case would be filed in the local Federal Court in the Easter District of Louisiana under any other circumstances.
In the State MDL before Judge Arnold New which is ongoing in the Phildelphia Court of Common Pleas, Judge New has elected to allow “Efficacy Claims” to be filed in that MDL in addition to claims related to uncontrolled bleeding. Judge Fallon has yet to follow suit and may not.
Efficacy claims are those that arise from blood clot related injuries, experienced by individuals while taking Xarelto. Arguably, Xarelto should have prevented these injuries from occurring. Plaintiff argues that due to Xarelto’s one time per day dosing, the anticoagulant intensity of Xarelto is depleted long before the patient consumes the next dose, leaving the patient exposed to the very injuries Xaretlo is intended to prevent. Plaintiffs content that the makers Xarelto designed its “one time per day” product simply to gain a marketing advantage over other multi time per day products it was competing against, primarily Pradaxa and Eliguis .
Subscribers to www.masstortnexus.com may access all documents related to the Xarelto Litigation MDL 2592 as well as the Xarelto Litigation ongoing in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas at Xarelto Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. Mass Tort Nexus Subscribers also have access to all forms, orders, documents and information related to all ongoing Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Product Liability Litigation’s in the Emerging Phase , Litigation as Phase well as the Settlement Phase.