LINX Implant Lawsuit Filed by Patient Fearing Eventual Failure After Recall

Plaintiff alleges the LINX Reflux Management System implants were defective, citing manufacturer admissions that certain recalled components were “out of specification.”

A Colorado man has filed a product liability lawsuit against the makers of the LINX esophageal implant, alleging the defective device leaves him facing surgical removal or the risk that its magnetic beads may break apart and migrate through his body.

The complaint (PDF) was filed by Johnathan Heath on June 26 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, naming Torax Medical, Inc., and Ethicon, Inc. as the defendants.

Heath accuses the manufacturers of selling a defective medical implant that can endanger the lives of its recipients. Even if the device does not fail, knowing that it is inside your body and could fail at any time has caused him anxiety and the need for regular medical monitoring, the lawsuit indicates.

LINX Reflux Management System Problems

At issue is the LINX Reflux Management System, which was developed by Torax Medical and approved in 2017 for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Torax was later acquired by Ethicon, a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary.

The LINX device consists of a small ring of magnetic beads connected by titanium wires, which is implanted around the lower esophageal sphincter to help prevent stomach acid from flowing back into the esophagus. Although the device was marketed as safe and effective, reports later emerged that the wires could break, allowing the magnetic beads to detach and migrate inside the body. In many cases, patients required additional surgery to remove the failed implant.

Those reports led the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to announce a LINX Reflux Management System recall in 2018.

Since then, a growing number of LINX implant lawsuits have been filed in courts nationwide. Heath’s complaint raises similar defect allegations, but differs from many other claims because his implant has not yet fractured. Instead, he alleges the device failed to relieve his GERD symptoms, leaving him to either undergo surgery to have it removed or continue living with the risk that it may fail in the future.

Heath’s complaint indicates he was surgically implanted with the LINX system to control his GERD symptoms, which was later subjected to the recall. He indicates that, while intact, he has suffered “a severe recurrence of GERD.” However, he has not had the device surgically removed yet.

The lawsuit notes that by promoting and distributing a defective medical implant, Torax violated federal regulations including manufacturing standards and standards of care.

“Plaintiff’s LINX was defectively manufactured and failed as a result of that defect. At the time the LINX device left the control of Defendant Torax, it was outside of manufacturing specification and was unreasonably dangerous due to its defective manufacture.”

– Johnathan Heath v. Torax Medical, et al.

According to the complaint, Torax itself admits that the device suffers from a manufacturing defect, acknowledging the problem was in “an out of specification condition” that caused the beads to come loose from the titanium wire in its own notice to customers.

FDA data indicated there were 9,131 LINX implants on the market as of May 2018.

Heath presents claims of manufacturing defect, negligence, and negligence per se. He seeks damages for past and future medical expenses, lost wages, physical pain and suffering, mental anguish, physical impairment and disfigurement.

LINX Implant Lawsuits

The U.S. was not the only country to recall the LINX implant, as the manufacturer also pulled LINX implants from certain foreign markets in September 2025, as concerns about the implants breaking continued to rise.

LINX recall lawyers are currently reviewing additional injury claims and pursuing compensation for patients who experienced complications, including:

• The need for revision surgery or removal of the device
• Device breakage or mechanical failure
• Migration of the implant
• Organ punctures or tissue damage