What is the Status of the Litigation for Pradaxa Internal Bleeding?
Thousands of complaints have been filed on behalf of individuals throughout the United States who suffered severe and often fatal injuries while using the anticoagulant Pradaxa.
In 2014, the drug maker reached a global settlement agreement to resolve the Pradaxa litigation for more than $650 million, settling about 4,000 cases before the first trial was scheduled to begin. However, as individuals continue to suffer severe and sometimes fatal bleeding complications, additional cases are being considered by the lawyers at Saiontz & Kirk, P.A.
Pradaxa MDL History
The first Pradaxa lawsuit was filed in March 2012, alleging that Boehringer Ingelheim negligently introduced and promoted their anticoagulant as superior to warfarin (Coumadin), without providing adequate warnings about the risk of internal bleeding from Pradaxa.
While users of Coumadin can be given a reversal agent if internal bleeding develops, the drug maker failed to warn that no such antidote is available to allow physicians to stop a hemorrhage or bleeding event that occurs while using Pradaxa.
On August 8, 2012, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) consolidated all Pradaxa proceedings pending throughout the federal court system before one judge for coordinated pretrial proceedings.
Lawsuits filed in U.S. District Courts throughout the country were transferred to Judge David R. Herndon in the Southern District of Illinois, where the Pradaxa MDL (multidistrict litigation) has been centralized.
Coordination of the federal Pradaxa litigation was designed to reduce duplicative discovery in hundreds of cases throughout the United States (allowing Plaintiffs to share common fact discovery), eliminate conflicting pretrial orders and schedules from different judges and to facilitate to the efficient conduct of the litigation.
While many confuse the MDL process with a Pradaxa class action lawsuit, it is very different, with each case remains an individual claim. The litigation does not proceed through a class representative, but each plaintiff must establish that their specific bleeding problems were caused by Pradaxa.
The multidistrict litigation centralized pretrial proceedings, discovery and “bellwether” Pradaxa trials were scheduled to help the parties gauge how juries are likely to respond to certain evidence and testimony that will be offered throughout many cases.
Prior to the scheduled start of trials in late 2014, a Pradaxa settlement was reached to resolve the litigation for $650 million, resulting in the trials being cancelled.
Since that time, additional users of the controversial medication have suffered bleeding problems on Pradaxa, and the warnings provided by the drug maker remain insufficient and inadequate.
As a result, additional Pradaxa bleeding injury claims are being reviewed nationwide. To review whether you or a loved one may be entitled to financial compensation, request a free consultation and case evaluation.