A group of women has filed an Essure adverse effects lawsuit against Bayer HealthCare. This lawsuit has recently been called to be removed from the Superior Court to the United States District Court.

On March 21, 2017, twenty-eight women filed a lawsuit together claiming that they each have suffered Essure adverse effects as a result of being implanted with the medical device.

This lawsuit has originally appeared in the Superior Court of Alameda County. However, the defendants say that because it is believed that this case has federal-question jurisdiction, the case should be tried in federal court instead.

In their Essure adverse effects lawsuit, the plaintiffs claim that Bayer did not warn them of serious health risks that came to be understood after Essure began to be sold in the United States.

Allegedly, the Essure device was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration based on studies that looked at the cases of less than 1,000 women. When it was approved, the FDA did not know that Essure was dangerous.

But since then, allegedly, Essure has been found to cause serious health complications such as uterus perforation, device migration or fracture, chronic pain, prolonged bleeding and ectopic pregnancies.

Serious Essure adverse effects were only noticed after thousands of devices had been implanted in women. The plaintiffs in this Essure lawsuit believe that Bayer HealthCare became aware of these serious problems and failed to directly inform healthcare providers and failed to report their knowledge to the FDA.

Allegedly, even after 16,000 Essure adverse effects complaints, Bayer still failed to notify both the medical community and consumers of the risks.

When the FDA did finally learn about the numerous Essure adverse effects, they required a black box warning to notify consumers and healthcare providers of the serious risks.

The plaintiffs claim that if Bayer had warned their own doctors and themselves about these risks, their subsequent health problems would have been avoided.

In addition to not warning about serious health problems, the defendants instead mounted an aggressive, nationwide marketing campaign to advertise their products, the women claim. According to the plaintiffs, this campaign was false and misleading.

Bayer claimed that Essure “eliminates the risks, discomforts and recovery time associated with surgical procedures.” Allegedly, Essure devices “stay secure, forming a protective barrier against pregnancy.”

This Essure Adverse Effects Lawsuit is Case No. 3:17-cv-02230-WHO, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Riverside.