On May 18, 2007, Minneapolis, MN Judge Donovan Frank heard arguments in what is expected to be the first of more than 1400 product liability lawsuits filed against Guidant Corporation over its implantable cardioverter defibrillators, or ICDs. Guidant Corporation, which was purchased by Boston Scientific Corporation in 2006, has recalled more than 300,000 separate ICDs and pacemakers since an initial Class I recall by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration over potential short circuits in Guidant’s Prizm and Contak Renewal ICDs.

In the Minneapolis case, Leopaldo Duron has filed suit against Guidant to recover the personal injury damages he suffered as a result of having his Guidant Prizm 2 implantable cardioverter defibrillator surgically replaced after the recall. Mr. Duron’s case has been call a “bellwether” case because he represents one of the three primary types of personal injury plaintiffs who have filed suit against Guidant in the matter of their recalled medical devices:

• Patients who, like Mr. Duron, have had their recalled Guidant medical devices explanted;
• Patients whose explant surgeries involved medical complications; and
• Patients who opted not to replace their recalled Guidant medical device.

Jury verdicts in bellwether cases may guide settlement discussions in cases with plaintiffs who have suffered similar personal injuries.

Duron’s recalled Guidant defibrillator never failed while it was implanted in his body. Duron underwent explantation after the death of Joshua Oukrop, a 21-year-old man from Grand Rapids, MN, who died after his implanted Guidant defibrillator failed to deliver the electric shock that could have restarted his heart.

Duron alleges that Guidant did not do enough to notify physicians and patients about the short circuit problems in their devices, suggesting that Guidant made a deliberate decision not to fix the problems because the company deemed the costs too expensive. During the hearing, Duron’s personal injury attorney read from an internal Guidant marketing memo that stated its staff was comprised of “money-hungry, market-share-at-any-cost individuals.” Guidant’s attorneys said the comment in the memo was intended as a joke.

Judge Frank did not rule on any motions presented Friday. Duron’s case is expected to go to trial in July 2007.

Sources: Janet Moore, “Guidant trial over devices set for July,” Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune, May 18, 2007; Christopher Snowbeck, “Guidant suit seeks punitive award,” Twin Cities Pioneer Press, May 18, 2007.