A new hernia mesh surgery lawsuit was filed in a federal court in Atlanta on Feb. 27, 2018. The plaintiffs are Earl C. and Cindy C., a married couple who are citizens and residents of the state of Arizona.

The defendants in this case are pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson Inc. and Ethicon Inc. The hernia mesh surgery lawsuit joins Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) No. 2782, In re: Ethicon Physiomesh Flexible Composite Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation.

Earl alleges he submitted to hernia mesh surgery and was implanted with the Physiomesh product on July 20, 2015. The hernia mesh surgery was done at Banner Del E. Webb Medical Center in Sun City West, Ariz. by Dr. James Cooper M.D.

Ethicon Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of parent company, Johnson & Johnson Inc. Ethicon is the developer, manufacturer, distributor and promoter of Ethicon Physiomesh which is used in hernia mesh surgery to treat such injuries.

What Makes Physiomesh Unique and What Have Been the Problems with It?

Ethicon Physiomesh is uniquely designed with five layers—four of which sandwich the first polypropylene mesh layer. The first two are coatings made of polydioxanone film followed by the second two layers made of poliglecaprone-25.

The defendants advertised this makeup as designed to decrease to chances of developing adhesions once placed within the body in a hernia mesh surgery. Adhesions are a type of internal gluing caused by scar tissue development.

According to the MDL, the composition of Physiomesh seemed to promote adhesions, increase inflammation and pain and trigger the body to react to the product as if it were an invading foreign body.

Patients implanted with this medical device have experienced migration of the mesh within the abdominal cavity and damage to nerves and tissues including tissue death.

Earl and his spouse Cindy are bringing the following counts from the MDL forward in their short-form complaint:

Count One: Strict Product Liability, Defective Design; Count Two: Strict Product Liability, Failure to Warn; Count Three: Strict Product Liability, Manufacturing Defect; Count Four: Negligence; Count Five: Violation of State of Arizona Consumer Fraud Act; Count Six: Gross Negligence; Count Seven: Loss of Consortium; Count Eight: Punitive Damages; and Count Nine: Discovery Rule, Equitable Tolling, Estoppel.

The couple is asking for a trial by jury with a favorable decision on their behalf according to evidence provided. They request compensatory damages with consideration included for all costs associated with litigation including court, attorney, and miscellaneous fees.

They ask for a review of mental and physical pain associated with alleged mesh injury as well as economic setbacks such as cost of past, present and ongoing medical treatment and loss of income and earning potential.

The Hernia Mesh Surgery Lawsuit is Case No. 1:18-cv-00884-RWS in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division.