The ObTape Transobturator Sling is a vaginal mesh that was sold between 2003 and 2006 by Mentor Corporation of Santa Barbara, California. It is a medical device which is implanted surgically to treat female stress urinary incontinence caused by weakening of muscles in the urethra.

A number of women who received the ObTape sling during a bladder suspension surgery have experienced problems and complications, such as severe pain, vaginal extrusions, erosion and urinary tract infections. Unlike other vaginal mesh, the ObTape bladder sling is made of small-pored, non-woven fibers, which could block vital nutrients and oxygen from reaching the tissue.

Following a hearing of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on November 20, 2008, all federal Mentor ObTape bladder sling lawsuits were consolidated for pretrial proceedings and centralized in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia as part of an MDL. At that time, 22 different lawsuits filed in District Courts throughout the United States were transferred to Georgia.

Recent reports suggest that there are now at least 32 Mentor ObTape lawsuits pending, with 29 of the cases in federal courts and another three in California state court. In addition, a number of ObTape lawyers who are investigating and documenting potential cases on behalf of women who have experienced problems, expect that additional lawsuits will be filed this year.

According to the National Law Journal, the first Mentor ObTape lawsuit went to trial last month in the Superior Court of California for Alameda County, where a jury ruled in favor of the manufacturer on December 15, 2008.

In that case, the plaintiff suffered from infection and erosion of her reproductive organs after the ObTape was surgically implanted in 2004.

The jury ruled in Mentor’s favor after finding that under the specific facts of the case, the plaintiff’s doctors were aware of the risks associated with the bladder sling and therefore, Mentor’s warnings were not found to be inadequate.

Despite the early setback, the California ObTape lawsuit ruling is not likely to have any impact on the likelihood for success in other cases pending throughout the United States and there are no signs that it will slow the Mentor ObTape bladder sling lawsuit filings.

Mentor Corp. currently faces at least 22 ObTape lawsuits pending in 12 different Courts. The cases have been filed by women who have suffered severe complications allegedly caused by a defective design in a vaginal bladder sling previously sold by Mentor to treat stress urinary incontinence.

The Mentor ObTape Sling contains a “nonwoven” design, which has been found to block essential nutrients and oxygen, potentially resulting in severe pain, vaginal extrusions, urinary tract erosion or infection.

In October 2008, Mentor filed a petition with the Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to consolidate all of the ObTape lawsuits that are currently pending or may be filed in the future. They asked that all of the cases be centralized before one judge for coordinated pretrial litigation in the Western District of Oklahoma or, in the alternative, in the Northern District of Oklahoma or Northern District of Ohio.

At a hearing on the petition November 20, 2008, attorneys representing women who have filed these lawsuits opposed the formation of an MDL, arguing that the litigation only involves one defendant and there are currently only a limited number of ObTape law firms investigating cases. However, they asked that if an MDL was formed, that the cases be transferred to the Middle District of Georgia, where the most cases are currently pending and the first ObTape lawsuit was filed.

There are currently 5 cases pending in the Middle District of Georgia, with 4 in the Middle District of Florida, 3 in the Western District of Oklahoma, 2 in the District of New Jersey and one each in the Western District of Missouri, Central District of California, Northern District of Georgia, Eastern District of New York, Southern District of Georgia, Eastern District of Louisiana, Northern District of Ohio and Northern District of Oklahoma.

The MDL Panel found that consolidation was appropriate in these cases, as they involve common questions of fact and that centralization in an MDL would help avoid inconsistent pretrial rulings in different Districts, duplicate discovery and would conserve the resources of the Court and the parties.

“All 22 actions share factual issues as to whether Mentor’s ‘ObTape’ brand transobturator sling, a device used to treat female stress urinary incontinence, was defectively designed and/or manufactured, and whether Mentor failed to provide adequate warnings concerning the device,” wrote Judge John G. Heyburn, II, Chairman of the Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in the Transfer Order entered December 3, 2008.

The cases will be assigned to U.S. District Judge Clay D. Land in the Middle District of Georgia, who the panel indicates has the time and experience to handle the MDL.

There are currently 22 bladder sling lawsuits pending against Mentor Corp. in 12 different federal district courts involving their ObTape. The product liability lawsuits were filed by women who have experienced complications they allege were caused by defects in the design and warnings of ObTape Transobturator Vaginal Slings.

ObTape was used in thousands of women between 2003 and 2006 to treat female stress urinary incontinence by supporting the muscles that control the flow of urine. Unlike other types of bladder lift surgical mesh, ObTape contains a “non-woven” design, which could block essential nutrients and oxygen, potentially leading to infection, vaginal extrusions, urinary tract erosion and other serious injuries.

Lawsuits are currently pending involving the surgical mesh in the Central District of California (1), Middle District of Florida (4), Middle District of Georgia (5), Northern District of Georgia (1), Sourthern District of Georgia (1), Eastern District of Louisiana (1), Western District of Missouri (1), District of New Jersey (2), Eastern District of New York (1), Northern District of Ohio (1), Northern District of Oklahoma (1) and Western District of Oklahoma (3).

Earlier this month, Mentor Corporation filed a motion to stay all of the individual ObTape lawsuits while the MDL Panel considers their request that the cases be coordinated through a federal procedure known as multidistrict litigation, or MDL.

The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, which is known informally as the MDL panel, determines whether civil actions involving one or more common questions of fact should be transferred to one court for coordinated pretrial litigation. The Panel also selects the judge and court which will be assigned to oversee the lawsuits.

The federal procedure is designed to eliminate duplicative discovery and inconsistent pretrial rulings that may be made by different judges in different districts throughout the United States. It is also intended to serve the convenience of the parties, the witnesses and the courts to centralize the litigation in one location.

Mentor Corporation is arguing that the cases should be consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma or Northern District of Oklahoma. In the alternative, they have requested centralization in the Northern District of Ohio.