A federal jury recently awarded $4 million in damages following a Bard IVC filter trial, stating that the device maker was responsible for damages.

A federal jury in Arizona recently determined that plaintiff Sherri B. is owed $4 million in damages, most of which Bard is responsible for. The punitive damages phase of the Bard IVC filter trial determined that Sherri was owed $2 million in compensatory damages and $2 million in punitive damages. The jury determined that Bard is responsible for 80 percent of the damages Sherri sustained, thus owing her $3.6 million.

The Bard IVC filter trial determined that Bard was not liable for strict product liability design defect, strict product liability failure to warn, or negligent design. However, the jury found that Bard liable for negligent failure to warn.

The jury awarded Sherri $2 million in punitive damages in addition to $2 million in compensatory damages. Whereas compensatory damages are meant to compensate plaintiffs for harm they sustained, punitive damages are intended as a punishment for the defendants and are awarded at the court’s discretion.

Sherri filed her lawsuit against Bard claiming that their G2 filter broke inside her vena cava, the body’s largest vein. She claimed she was only 37 when she had the device placed inside her inferior vena cava, and by 2014 she had to have open heart surgery to retrieve the filter pieces with partial success.

Although Bard attempted to argue that the open-heart surgery caused injury to Sherri, the jury found the surgeon who performed the surgery was not at fault. Instead, 20 percent of the responsibility has been attributed to a radiologist who failed to flag Sherri’s device as visibly separated in a 2009 X-ray.

The G2 filter was allegedly approved by the FDA under the certification that it was reasonably similar to a previous device, the Bard Recovery filter. The Bard IVC filter trial argued that the lack of testing from the G2 device allowed the device to be released with design defects. The lawyers also stated that Bard should have said to doctors, “whoever and wherever you are in the medical community, we gave you something dangerous and we need to fix it before it causes irreversible damage,” according to Law360.

During the punitive phase, Sherri’s lawyers focused heavily on the alleged $1 billion cash Bard had on hand after releasing the device, despite alleged reports that the device caused complications. They also mentioned that a top Bard executive made a total of $35.2 million between 2014 and 2016.

During the Bard IVC filter trial, Bard’s lawyers argued that a large punitive award would damage the market, depriving physicians of the tools they need and incentivizing other companies to quit making tools. The judge allegedly then instructed the jury to not factor effects on other companies into their punitive decision.

Sherri’s Bard IVC filter trial is part of a multi-district litigation under U.S. District Judge David Campbell, which includes more than 3,600 plaintiffs. In the following weeks, a more than one Bard IVC filter trial will take place in an attempt to pinpoint the sturdiness and dollar value of the implant patients’ claims.

The IVC Filter Lawsuit is Case No. 2:16-cv-00474, In re: Bard IVC Filters Products Liability Litigation, Case No. 2:15-md-02641, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona.