Medtronic Lawsuit Judge will not Remove Himself From Case

U.S. District Judge Richard H. Kyle, who dismissed all federal Medtronic lawsuits filed over the recalled Sprint Fidelis defibrillator lead, has indicated he will not remove himself from the case, despite the possible appearance of bias caused by his son’s law firm representing Medtronic in a number of unrelated matters.

The lawyers for individuals who have filed a Sprint Fidelis lawsuit against Medtronic, asked Judge Kyle to recuse, or remove, himself from the case after they learned that his son was a partner in a Minneapolis law firm, Frederikson & Byron, which has handled a reported $14 billion in “deals” with Medtronic.

When Judge Kyle granted a Motion to Dismiss the defibrillator lead lawsuits against Medtronic on January 5, 2009, his order potentially saved Medtronic millions of dollars in settlements and verdicts they may have been required to pay for selling defective leads that connect cardiac defibrillators to the heart.

Over 200,000 people have the faulty leads running through the veins connected to their heart to carry a potentially life-saving electrical jolt if needed. However, Medtronic issued a Sprint Fidelis lead recall in October 2007, because the thin wires were found to be substantially more prone to fracture or break than other available leads.

Judge Kyle was assigned to handle all federal Medtronic lead lawsuits, which were consolidated in a multidistrict litigation on February 21, 2008, and centralized in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.

According to plaintiffs’ lawyers, they discovered in February 2009 that Frederikson & Byron had a “deep, pervasive and ongoing” relationship with Medtronic, representing them in a number of matters and having several former Medtronic attorneys now working for the firm.

The plaintiffs contended that because Judge Kyle’s son was a shareholder in the firm, a strong presumption exists that the Judge is biased and that he must remove himself from the case because a reasonable person would question his impartiality.

In denying the plaintiffs’ request, Judge Kyle questioned the timing of the Motion, which came only weeks after he took an unfavorable position in dismissing the litigation.

Judge Kyle indicated that given the close relationship between Medtronic and the Frederikson law firm, it was not likely that any ruling the Court may have made would have an impact on the business the firm receives or his son’s financial interests. The Judge’s son, Richard H. Kyle, Jr., is a partner in the firm, but practices criminal defense and has not personally represented Medtronic in any matters.

The Opinion and Order issued by Judge Kyle on March 9, 2009, points to prior cases with similar situations where recusal was not necessary and indicated that the plaintiffs’ position would require judges run conflict searches through any law firms employing any members of their family, which “would cripple the bench.”

Judge Kyle’s decision to grant Medtronic’s Motion to Dismiss in January was based on a Supreme Court decision issued last year, Riegel v. Medtronic, which held that product liability lawsuits against manufacturers of medical devices are pre-empted by federal law if the devices have been approved by the FDA.

In response to the Supreme Court decision, the Medical Device Safety Act of 2009 was introduced last week in the U.S. House and U.S. Senate to protect the ability of consumers injured by medical devices to hold the manufacturer responsible for negligent designs that result in faulty products. If the bill is enacted as law, it is possible that it could restore the Medtronic Sprint Fidelis lawsuits.