Many patients across the country have filed their own cardiac surgery infection lawsuit, after allegedly developing bacterial infection after using the Stockert 3T Heater Cooler device.

A group of plaintiffs who filed their own cardiac surgery infection lawsuit has filed a petition with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) in January 2017. However on April 5, 2017, the JPML issued an order denying MDL status, stating the consolidation was “not necessary.”

The petitions was a motion to consolidate all federal Stockert 3T cardiac surgery heater cooler lawsuits to streamline the litigation process. There have been enough patients who filed their cardiac surgery infection lawsuit to pursue damages to potentially form a multidistrict litigation (MDL).

If granted MDL status, these cardiac surgery infection lawsuits could be consolidated into a single litigation. Each of these 3T Heater Cooler cardiac surgery infection lawsuits allege the device had caused them to develop deadly bacterial infections soon after their open heart surgeries.

Each of the claimants were affected by rare forms of nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) M. chimaera, which allegedly occurs due to the equipment becoming infected by the bacterial cells.

Stockert 3T Heater Cooler devices are primarily used during open heart surgeries to regulate the patient’s body temperature. The device consists of a blanket and two water tanks that never touch the patient, but the water reportedly aerosolizes and enters the operating room through the exhaust vents. If the water in the system carries the bacteria, it can enter the open surgical site through the air.

Overview of 3T Heater Cooler Cardiac Surgery Infection Lawsuit Consolidation Effort

The claimants argued that the pending 3T Heater Cooler cardiac surgery infection lawsuits shared common elements in their allegations and evidence, and that consolidation would prevent duplicative discovery and confusing evidence by counts.

The claimants also requested the JPML to have the MDL centered in the U.S. District of South Carolina, which is considered the most ideal location. Manufacturing company and defendant LivaNova and Sorin Group, as well as a different group of plaintiffs, have opposed consolidation.

The opponents argued there were too many factors between each 3T Heater Cooler cardiac surgery infection lawsuit, which would make coordination difficult. In addition, opponents also argued that the 3T Heater Cooler cardiac surgery infection claims could overlap pretrial proceedings.

Ultimately the JPML had denied the motion for consolidation, leaving the 3T Heater Cooler cardiac surgery infection lawsuits to their individual litigation proceedings. According to its order, the JPML stated consolidation was not necessary because “any overlapping pretrial proceedings have been and can continue to be handled through informal coordination.”

There were 16 actions from six districts, and 10 of the 3T Heater Cooler cardiac surgery infection lawsuits were being informally coordinated in a South Carolina federal court. The JPML noted the parties involved in the six pending cases outside of South Carolina had opposed consolidation as they were already working to prevent overlapping pretrial materials.

With these factors in mind, the JPML ultimately decided there was not enough reason to “disrupt the parties’ successful efforts at information coordination.”