The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 ruling in Riegel v. Medtronic, which held that federal approval of a medical device pre-empts most state law tort claims, created a headache for plaintiffs and the courts alike. In a decision on Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit joined other appeals courts that have since grappled with the scope of federal pre-emption, especially in cases where a company is accused of promoting medical devices for off-label uses.
Siding with a team at Mayer Brown led by Andrew Tauber of Mayer Brown, a Tenth Circuit panel ruled 2-1 that state law claims brought by Patricia Caplinger over Medtronic Inc.’s Infuse spinal fusion device were pre-empted. The ruling came just a day after a Minnesota appellate court mostly sided with Tauber and Medtronic in a separate Infuse case.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
