IVC Filter Class Action Lawsuit Certified on Appeal

Ontario’s Divisional Court has certified an IVC filter class action lawsuit alleging the medical device maker failed to warn patients about the risks.

Lead plaintiffs, Arie Kuiper, Wendy Kopeck, and Garry Kopeck alleged in their IVC filter class action lawsuit that the maker of the device, Cook (Canada) Inc., did not warn patients and physicians of a number of risks including device migration, perforation, fracture, embolization, and an inability to retrieve the filter. Additionally, the plaintiffs claimed that the Cook IVC filters were defectively designed, leaving them more likely to malfunction.

An IVC filter is a medical device meant to catch blood clots before they move to major organs, like the heart or lungs, and potentially cause severe injuries or even death. The devices are inserted into inferior vena cava (IVC), where they, in theory, help stop the movement of clots throughout the body. The IVC filter class action lawsuit alleges that the Cook IVC filters were meant to be retrievable, so the patient could have them removed.

Instead of making them retrievable, the IVC filter class action lawsuit alleged that Cook’s design made it less likely that the filters could withstand the constant pressure and movement of the vena cava. Additionally, the device maker allegedly failed to tell physicians of the risks of their retrievable filter, rendering the doctors unable to pass that information along to patients to make an informed decision.

The proposed Class of those who had been implanted with Cook IVC filters was originally denied certification. The judge who initially denied certification of the IVC filter class action lawsuit ruled that the plaintiffs had not established that Cook had a duty to warn physicians about the risks of the device. In addition, the judge found that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated that there were common issues of defective design amongst Class Members.

The plaintiffs appealed the ruling and an Ontario appeals court reversed the ruling regarding Cook’s duty to warn physicians of the risks of the IVC filters. The appeals court pointed out that evidence of several risk advisories about the Cook IVC filters had been presented by the plaintiffs. Based on those risk advisories, the plaintiffs may be able to establish that Cook had a duty to warn physicians about the risks related to their IVC filters.

The appeals court did agree with the original ruling regarding the defective design.  The appeals court ruled that there was no overriding error in the original court’s decision to not certify the Class based on design defect claims based on an admission by the plaintiffs’ expert that he was not an expert in the design or manufacture of IVC filters.

Do you think the device maker had a duty to warn patients of the risks of IVC filters? Tell us your opinion in the comment section below!

The certified Class and lead plaintiffs are represented by Jonathan Ptak, Adam Tanel, Daniel Bach, and Matthew D. Baer.

The IVC Filter Class Action Lawsuit is Arie Kuiper, et al. v. Cook (Canada) Inc., et al., Case No. 766/18, in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice Divisional Court, Canada.

Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:

Wright Profemur Hip Implant Class Action Settlement Reached in Canada

Canada to Pay Nearly $240M to the Mohawks in Land Settlement

Kellogg Canada to Phase Out Use of Glyphosate Products

Canada Reimbursing Workers Impacted by Phoenix Pay System