Judge Appoints Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawyers to Leadership Roles in Boston Scientific MDL

Group of 19 attorneys were assigned to various leadership positions in the federal litigation, which includes a growing number of Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator lawsuits being pursued by individual nationwide.

The U.S. District Judge presiding over all spinal cord stimulator lawsuits being pursued against Boston Scientific in the federal court system has appointed a group of lawyers to serve in key leadership positions, taking certain actions that benefit all plaintiffs during the coordinated pretrial proceedings.

Spinal cord stimulators are medical implants consisting of electrodes and a battery-powered pulse generator placed under the skin near the spine, as well as an external remote control. The devices use mild pulses of electricity that are supposed to be calibrated to prevent the pain signals from reaching the brain.

However, the devices have been linked to an alarming number of reports involving painful and debilitating spinal cord stimulator problems, including risks of lead fractures and migration, which can cause the devices to malfunction, deliver painful electrical shocks and worsen chronic pain rather than relieve it.

As a result, a growing number of lawsuits have been filed against Boston Scientific, Abbott Laboratories, Medtronic and Nevro over the design of the companies’ spinal cord stimulator devices. Many claims contain similar allegations by users who say they were implanted with the chronic pain treatment devices, yet suffered injuries and other health complications as a result.

Boston Scientific Lawsuit Consolidation

Earlier this year, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) assigned all federal Boston Scientific lawsuits to U.S. District Judge Josephine Staton, creating a Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator lawsuit multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the Central District of California. The judge will guide the litigation through coordinated discovery, pretrial proceedings and a likely series of early test “bellwether” trials.

Judge Staton and attorneys for the plaintiffs and the defendants met for an initial scheduling conference on August 5, where they addressed the leadership structure for plaintiffs’ attorneys and appointed some to leadership positions in the litigation.

In an August 13 pretrial order (PDF) the judge announced the appointment of 19 spinal cord stimulator injury lawyers to serve in various leadership positions. This includes three attorneys assigned to serve as co-lead counsel, one plaintiffs’ liaison counsel, a four-person plaintiffs’ executive committee, a six person plaintiffs steering committee, and five attorneys appointed to serve as a leadership development committee designed to coach younger attorneys on how to handle multidistrict litigations.

Such appointments are designed to represent the interests of everyone with a pending claim. This structure is common in mass tort litigation, helping ensure plaintiffs are represented consistently while channeling key information and decisions through a small group of lawyers rather than every firm involved nationwide.

Judge Staton noted that additional leadership may be appointed in the future if circumstances change and the need arises.

Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuits

When the Boston Scientific claims were consolidated, plaintiffs had originally sought for all spinal cord stimulator lawsuits, regardless of manufacturer, to be rolled into one MDL. However, the JPML refused, saying the cases, injuries and products were too diverse.

Since then, plaintiffs have filed separate motions calling for Nevro stimulator lawsuit consolidation and Abbott stimulator lawsuit consolidation. Both motions are asking for the cases to be centralized as separate proceedings in the same district as the Boston Scientific stimulator MDL. The JPML is scheduled to hear arguments on September 24 over those issues.

In the meantime, spinal cord stimulator lawyers continue to review plaintiffs’ claims of injuries caused by spinal cord stimulator problems, including:

Individuals who believe they may qualify for a spinal cord stimulator lawsuit can request a free case evaluation. Attorneys handling these claims work on a contingency fee basis, meaning there are no upfront costs and fees are only collected if compensation is recovered.

Sign up for more legal news that could affect you or your family.