Source: https://www.wfbm.com/what-we-do/life-sciences-law/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 04:01:29+00:00

Document:
Walsworth’s Life Sciences practice focuses on the defense of pharmaceutical, medical device and dietary and herbal supplement and research institutions in product liability claims, brought individually, as mass tort, multi-district litigation (MDL), or class action litigation. Our class action lawyers have substantial experience litigating the nuanced differences between various state and federal class action provisions, including the Class Action Fairness Act, and have successfully defeated class certification in numerous cases, which resulted in a significant reduction in the value of the case. The firm’s clients derive substantial benefit from our experienced team of trial lawyers who have successfully taken numerous product cases to verdict and stand ready to try cases at any time and location.
We have represented clients as both local and regional counsel, and we have also served as national coordinating counsel for a number of our clients. Our in-depth knowledge about our clients’ products and businesses leads to novel strategies and results that, in many cases, our clients thought at the beginning of the litigation were not possible. Walsworth clients look to our experience and level of commitment in developing national strategies and handling all phases of litigation, including appeals.
In addition to exceptional representation in the courtroom, we also provide pre-litigation avoidance counseling. Our extensive litigation experience, technical expertise and knowledge of our clients’ industries are keys to our success in helping clients assess risk and avoid litigation.
Hyoung v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals – Dismissal of generic pharmaceutical manufacturer from a personal injury product liability case where the plaintiff claimed she developed Stevens Johnson Syndrome from ingestion of drug.
Gonzalez v. Various Defendants – Dismissal of a drug manufacturer client from a personal injury product liability action at the outset of case in response to a planned filing of a demurrer.
Truong v. Teva Parenteral Medicines, Inc. – Dismissal of a pharmaceutical manufacturer from a personal injury product liability action.
Almaguer v. Centurion – Dismissal of medical device manufacturer in personal injury product liability case. Plaintiff sought damages for permanent injuries to a minor allegedly resulting from defective circumcision clamp.
Matheson v. StelKast – Dismissal of hip implant manufacturer in personal injury product liability action.
Judgment entered in favor of medical device manufacturer client following two rounds of successful dispositive motions. While motion for summary judgment was pending, plaintiff was granted leave to amend her complaint to add new causes of action. A demurrer was filed on behalf of manufacturer client and sustained by the court, without leave to amend.
Morgan v. Wang – Dismissal of a medical device manufacturer in a personal injury product liability and fraud action where plaintiff sought damages related to a spinal fusion procedure.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.