Sometimes a case has one bright shining point floating in a sea of not-so-good ones, or a stand-out result lost among outcomes that should have gone the other way. That describes Isaac v. C.R. Bard, Inc., No. A-19-CV-895, 2021 WL 1177882 (W.D. Tex. Mar. 29, 2021), a case remanded from the Bard IVC filter
It may be tempting to dismiss as boilerplate the “choice of law” discussion that precedes the “standard of review” in a typical brief. But while choice of law may not always be challenging or pivotal, just as often it is both. Today’s case, Peterson v. C.R. Bard Incorporated, 2021 WL 799305 (D. Or. Mar.
The Pelvic Mesh MDLs are now all but over, with all but a few stragglers either settled or remanded. But the specious logic used in that litigation to overturn decades of precedent that had recognized compliance with FDA regulatory actions as relevant and admissible evidence, is still afoot to haunt medical device manufacturers. As we’ve
We begin with an update on the “visiting dogs’ health crisis.” All medications are finished, special diets are a thing of the past, and (dare we say it out loud) all canine digestive tracts seem peaceful. The chubby Pomeranian was relieved of about four inches of hair today at the hands of a
Last weekend, the Drug and Device Law Rock Climber passed through to drop off her two dogs – a four-pound Chihuahua and a chubby Pomeranian, now hirsute, who was nearly bald from a skin infection when he was rescued a year ago. These are very cute dogs who mostly get along with the Drug and
People have long been fascinated by robots. Way before the term was coined in a 1920 play or Isaac Asimov popularized it, there were stories about machines that acted like living things. The droids of Star Wars universe are famed for the likeability and pluck. However, there is still the specter that some of those
Like the rest of you, we have enjoyed streaming new video offerings as we stave off social deprivation. But, more often than not, we find ourselves resorting to our “go to” stalwarts (we have mentioned Season 5, Episode 9 of Downton Abbey), among which we choose depending on the particular chord that needs to be
Truly unique cases are, well, unique. Most cases involve variations or combinations of cases we have seen before. Sometimes you get different results between two decisions on basically the same case with a single fact different. In February, we posted on an Eastern District of Pennsylvania decision on a motion to dismiss in a case
This Wednesday evening marks the beginning of the Jewish holiday of Passover. In every other year, our large extended family has gathered for Seder, a ritual dinner that commemorates, with traditional foods, songs, and prayers, the exodus of the Israelites from slavery in ancient Egypt. In our family, Seder is a beloved (and occasionally raucous)
Last week with dismay, we described the Eastern District of Pennsylvania’s decision in Gross v. Coloplast Corp., et al., 2020 WL 264691 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 17, 2020). The Gross court (we are resisting the immature cheap shot) “predicted,” in the face of decades of contrary evidence, that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would not extend