Two medical device companies that were hit last month with a $33 million verdict over their allegedly defective blood filter devices are seeking to have the award overturned.

Rex Medical and Argon Medical Devices have filed a post-trial motion in the case, captioned Reed-Brown v. Rex Medical, in which a jury handed up the multimillion-dollar award Oct. 28. The motion argues that Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Michael Erdos, who oversaw the nearly three-week trial, among other things, allowed the jury to hear improper evidence.

The 55-page post-trial motion argued that the jury's more than $30 million punitive damages award was excessive and the result of "gamesmanship."

Specifically, the defendants said that the punitive award, which was nine times the compensatory verdict, showed that the jury was trying to impose "the highest punitive damages award against Rex while staying within a 'single digit' multiplier range to attempt to avoid remittitur under a due process argument."

The papers were filed last week by Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith attorneys Walter "Pete" Swayze III and Megan Grossman.

"The actions of the jury here were calculated and precise. This punitive damages award is not based on the harms actually suffered by plaintiff, nor are they proportionate to the actions taken by Rex to bring the [filter] to the market," Swayze said in the motion. "This is gamesmanship and a working of the system and is clearly not in line with the actual evidence of the case. Thus, this court should strike this award altogether."

Reed-Brown was the first case to come before a Philadelphia jury from the litigation focused on inferior vena cava, or IVC, filters. According to the consolidated docket in Philadelphia, more than 790 lawsuits are pending in the court's vena cava mass tort program. That is in addition to the more than 15,000 filter cases pending in federal courts.

The litigation focused on allegations that the defendants failed to properly warn about the dangers of the filter devices, which were designed to prevent blood clots, but can allegedly migrate or fracture in patients' bodies, causing perforations. The injuries, according to plaintiffs, put patients at risk for a host of medical problems, including gastrointestinal difficulties, kidney failure and death.

In her lawsuit, Tracy Reed-Brown, a Georgia resident, alleged she was implanted with the "Option Retrievable" filter device in December 2016 in Georgia, but the device later perforated through the wall of her vena cava, causing severe pain and complications, including fear and anxiety that the device may fracture, which could be fatal. According to Reed-Brown's complaint, the device was manufactured by Rex Medical and distributed by Argon Medical Devices.

The complaint said the defendants failed to conduct sufficient clinical testing, and knew or should have known that there was a high rate of embedments, fracture and migrations, but failed to warn. The complaint raised negligence, strict liability, design defect, manufacturing defect, breach of warranty and negligent misrepresentation claims.

David Matthews of the Houston-based firm Matthews & Associates, along with Rosemary Pinto of the Philadelphia-based firm Feldman & Pinto and Timothy Goss of Freese & Goss in Dallas, represented Reed-Brown at trial.

According to the defendants' post-trial motions, the "most compelling" basis for either tossing the verdict entirely or granting a new trial was that there was a "complete lack of evidence to bridge the causal gap between allegedly inadequate warnings and plaintiff's alleged injuries."

"Throughout the entirety of discovery and trial in this case, there was not a single shred of evidence that any of plaintiff's health care providers would have altered their conduct based upon the presence of different or additions warnings or communications," the defendant said.

Neither Swayze, nor Matthews returned a message seeking comment.