A new lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana on Oct. 18, 2017, following a death allegedly caused by a Xarelto brain bleed.

Plaintiff Alicia D. is a surviving spouse who is joining multidistrict litigation (MDL) No. 2592 against the defendants on behalf of herself and her late husband, Paul D. The defendants are Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson Inc., and the Bayer Corporation.

According to this Xarelto brain bleed lawsuit, Paul D. took the blood-thinning medication for a six-month period from April to October 2015. Towards the end of October, he experienced an intracranial Xarelto brain bleed as purported in the legal documentation. He succumbed to death a day later because of sustained injuries attributed to the medication.

As outlined in the legal documentation, Xarelto was first marketed in the U.S. on July 1, 2011. It is part of a group of medications which were created to compete with warfarin, also known as Coumadin, a “tried and true” blood-thinning medication that has been in use successfully for 60 years. This group of medications is formerly known as new oral anticoagulants (NOACs).

According to this Xarelto brain bleed lawsuit, Xarelto was approved as a preventative blood-clot medication for patients undergoing total knee or hip arthroscopy. It also had the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) approval for the prevention of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), and stroke secondary to a condition known as atrial fibrillation.

In the factual section of this Xarelto brain bleed lawsuit, the narrative discusses the defendants’ promotion of the anticoagulant drug. It talks about how the manufacturers desired to set it apart from warfarin by emphasizing its convenience. As a requirement of treatment, warfarin comes with the need for frequent blood plasma level testing.

Patients must also adhere to certain dietary restrictions when on the established blood-thinner. With NOACs, a patient is supposedly free to live their life more conveniently without these time-consuming annoyances as the defendants promoted and marketed the medication.

The manufacturers’ created an image of safety and ease and allegedly “cherry-picked” data from three studies known as the ROCKET AF, RECORD, and EINSTEIN to demonstrate its difference and minimize any concerns and risks.

The plaintiff believes that her late husband and herself were convinced by these misleading advertisements and that her husband later suffered serious injuries. They were not alone. In 2012, 2,081 adverse events related to Xarelto were reported and 151 of those events led to the death of the patient.

Alicia D., on behalf of herself and the estate of her husband, is bringing the following counts: Count One –Strict Liability; Count Two –Manufacturing Defect; Count Three –Design Defect; Count Four –Failure to Warn; Count Five –Negligence; Count Six –Breach of Express Warranty; Count Seven –Breach of Implied Warranty; Count Eight –Negligent Misrepresentation; Count Nine –Fraud; Count Ten –Violation of Consumer Protection Laws; Count Eleven –Loss of Consortium; Count Twelve –Wrongful Death; and Count Thirteen –Survival Action.

The plaintiff is asking for a jury trial, compensatory damages in excess of the jurisdictional amount that takes into account pain and suffering, emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life. She hopes for consideration of all economic liabilities in the form of medical bills, death and funeral expenses, and court and attorney’s fees.

The Xarelto Brain Bleed Lawsuit is Case No. 2:17-cv-10782-EEF-MBN in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.