A new Pinnacle hip implant lawsuit has been filed by a Texas plaintiff alleging he suffered personal injury as a result of his defective hip implant.

Plaintiff Thomas D. filed his Pinnacle hip implant lawsuit within the DePuy Orthopaedics MDL that is currently underway in a Texas federal court. Due to the large number of similar lawsuits against DePuy and Johnson & Johnson over its Pinnacle hip implant, the multidistrict litigation was formed to streamline the legal process for these lawsuits.

As of the most recent report by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, there are currently 9,926 Pinnacle hip implant lawsuit cases, and each of these lawsuits claims similar allegations against the defendants. These lawsuits were consolidated in order to streamline pretrial proceedings, conserving time, financial and human resources.

The Pinnacle hip implant lawsuit claims that the Pinnacle metal hip device was designed with younger, active patients in mind, and claimed it was superior to other devices in its ability to provide pain relief and consistent, smooth range of motion.

However, the Pinnacle hip implant lawsuit goes on to allege that DePuy and Johnson & Johnson are aware that its metal hip device can cause patients to develop metallosis, or metal toxicity, as well as a high implant failure rate that requires revision surgery.

Metallosis linked to these implants may lead to nearby tissue death, erosion of bone, development of tumors and pseudotumors, and can have systemic effects in bodily systems and can also cause organ damage. Plaintiffs say the severe pain and inflammation, among other issues, may only be ameliorated with the removal of the DePuy Pinnacle hip implant and the replacement of the implant with a different device that does not have a metal-on-metal design to cause such issues.

The Pinnacle hip implant lawsuit states that the manufacturers of the hip implant neglected to seek premarket approval from the FDA, and as a result, the FDA made no finding that the hip implant was safe or effective before it was marketed to the public.

Additionally, the lawsuit claims that the device was not properly tested. If it was, plaintiffs claim, it would be discovered that the hip implant leads to metallosis and other complications in patients, and these would have been discovered had proper testing been conducted before its market release.

Thomas says he had his hips bilaterally implanted in 2010, and in 2016, he found himself in severe pain and with limited mobility. He underwent revision surgery to remove the allegedly defective device in his right hip first. Then three months later, he had the device removed from his left hip.

“All of the injuries and complications suffered by Plaintiff or caused by the defective design, lack of adequate warnings, construction and unreasonably dangerous character of the Pinnacle Device that was implanted in them,” the Pinnacle hip implant lawsuit reads.

As a result, the plaintiff has raised a number of allegations against the defendants including negligence, failure to warn, manufacturing defect, design defect, negligent misrepresentation and breaches of express and implied warranties.

Thomas is seeking damages for pain and suffering, wage loss, loss of earnings and loss of earning capacity, medical expenses, loss of enjoyment of life, mental anguish and distress, disfigurement, physical impairment, attorneys’ fees and costs, punitive or exemplary damages, pre-and post-judgment interest and any additional relief as deemed just and proper by the Court.

The Pinnacle Hip Implant Lawsuit is Case No. 3:17-cc-03153-K and is part of the DePuy MDL, MDL No. 2244 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division.