Mirena MDL Update: Judge Dismisses 31 Cases as Time-Barred
On January 9, Judge Cathy Seibel, who presides over the Mirena MDL in the Southern District of New York (In re: Mirena® IUD Products Liability Litigation, MDL 2434), granted Bayer’s motion to dismiss 31 cases as time-barred under Louisiana, California, Oklahoma and Ohio law. Judge Seibel ruled that none of these plaintiffs’ claims are saved by the discovery rule because they were aware or should have been aware of the cause of their injuries within the applicable statute of limitations period.
The court had previously issued Case Management Order 22A, where Bayer was allowed to submit a letter explaining why each case should be dismissed consistent with the court’s opinion in Truitt v. Bayer, Case No. 13-cv-7811 (S.D.N.Y. July 2, 2014), and each of the plaintiffs were required to either voluntarily dismiss her case with prejudice or set forth facts and/or law to distinguish her case from Truitt v. Bayer.
Mirena® is an intrauterine device (IUD) manufactured by Bayer Pharmaceuticals. The device is a t-shaped IUD which is inserted into a woman’s uterus and serves as a pregnancy prevention method – for up to five years. The device releases the hormone levonorgestrel – a third generation progestin – into the uterus to prevent the release of eggs from a woman’s ovaries. Generally, plaintiffs allege that the Mirena® IUD migrates from its original position in a woman’s body and causes serious injuries, such as uterine perforation, ectopic pregnancies, infertility, embedment of the device in the uterine wall or other organs, migration of the IUD, serious infections, and surgical removal of the device. Plaintiffs also allege that the product manufacturer failed to adequately warn women of the serious risks associated with the Mirena® IUD.
The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely on advertisements. Past results of cases afford no guarantee of future results and every case is different and must be judged on its own merits.