Tag Archives: Product Liability

Upcoming Free CLE Webinar: “The Internet of Things’ Impact on the Health Care Industry: Diagnosing the Dangers with Disruptive Technology”

Reed Smith not only assists our pharmaceutical and medical device clients with their current legal challenges and opportunities, we look around corners to anticipate the next industry disruptor – and to help our clients navigate the legal issues that come with it. For our life sciences clients, the Internet of Things is clearly a game … Continue Reading

Upcoming Free CLE Webinar: “3D Printing: Component Parts/Raw Materials Product Liability & Health Risks”

Reed Smith is at the forefront of thought leadership surrounding 3D printing and how this revolutionary technology will impact our pharmaceutical and medical device clients, as well as universities and other leading medical centers which are incorporating this technology into patient care. Our 3D printing team has authored two white papers (available here and here) … Continue Reading

Upcoming Free CLE Webinar: “3D Printing: What Could Happen to Products Liability When Users (and Everyone Else in Between) Become Manufacturers”

The Reed Smith life sciences product liability and 3D printing teams will be hosting an upcoming CLE webinar “3D Printing: What Could Happen to Products Liability When Users (and Everyone Else in Between) Become Manufacturers” on May 8, 2017 at 12 p.m. ET. Reed Smith presenters Jim Beck and Matt Jacobson will be discussing 3D … Continue Reading

Reed Smith Launches Second Edition of 3D Printing White Paper

Following up the success of its first, medical device-focused 3D printing white paper, 3D Printing of Medical Devices:  When a Novel Technology Meets Traditional Legal Principles, Reed Smith’s 3D Printing Task Force has now launched a second edition of its 3D printing publication white paper addressing 3D printed products more broadly:  3D Printing of Manufactured Goods: … Continue Reading

MDR Reporting Final Guidance

FDA issued a final guidance on November 8, 2016, “Medical Device Reporting for Manufacturers”.  As with all such guidance documents, it is nonbinding:  “It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public.”  Nevertheless, for those interested in medical device reporting, the document is required reading as … Continue Reading

Reed Smith Attorneys to Speak at Upcoming “Women Leaders in Life Sciences Law” Conference

Two members of Reed Smith’s Life Sciences Health Industry (LSHI) group will be speaking at the American Conference Institute’s 3rd Annual Conference on Women Leaders in Life Sciences Law taking place in Boston on July 27-29, 2016. On July 28, Reed Smith partner and co-chair of the firm’s LSHI group, Melissa A. Geist will discuss … Continue Reading

French Supreme Court Ruling Clarifies Liability For Defective Products

A February 25, 2016, decision by the French Supreme Court clarifies some conditions for the imposition of liability with respect to defective products in ways that may be surprising to those more accustomed to U.S. product liability law. In the case at hand, a patient was prescribed Mediator, an appetite suppressant, between 1998 and 2008. … Continue Reading

FDA Publishes Draft Guidance Regarding 3D Printing Of Medical Devices

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved more than 80 medical devices that involve 3D printing and one prescription drug.  It also held a public workshop to obtain information and input about 3D printing issues on October 8 and 9, 2014.  FDA brought together technical 3D printing expertise from various industries and sectors … Continue Reading

IEEE Developing New Standards for 3D Printers For Medical Uses

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Standards Association (IEEE) is developing new interoperability standards for medical devices, 3D printers and other eHealth devices.  IEEE P3333.2.5, Draft Standard for Bio-CAD File Format for Medical 3D Printing is intended to develop standard methods for the printing of 3D-printed prosthetics and medical devices.  IEEE proposes to define … Continue Reading

Attention Out-of-State Plaintiffs: The Tour Ends Here. Next Stop, Home

Last year, the Supreme Court sent a resounding message regarding personal jurisdiction when it decided Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S.Ct. 746, 752 (2014).  Bauman announced a significantly more stringent standard for finding a corporation to be “essentially at home” in a foreign jurisdiction and, as a result, made personal jurisdiction harder to establish in … Continue Reading

3D Printing of Medical Devices: When a Novel Technology Meets Traditional Legal Principles

3D printing is quite possibly the next greatest chapter in the industrial revolution, and the technology is moving rapidly.  Reed Smith’s Life Sciences Health Industry Group recently launched its first 3D printing publication white paper – 3D Printing of Medical Devices:  When a Novel Technology Meets Traditional Legal Principles.  This paper explores unchartered legal issues … Continue Reading

Proceed with Caution: Attorney-Client Privilege and Communications with Third-Party Consultants

In our modern economy, businesses regularly use all manner of third-party consultants for many different reasons, including cost, efficiency, and expertise.  Less regularly, communications between businesses and consultants are the subject of discovery motion practice in litigation.  Two recent decisions out of the Southern District of New York demonstrate why businesses that use third-party consultants … Continue Reading

New Jersey’s DTC Advertising Exception to the Learned Intermediary Doctrine

When the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled in Perez v. Wyeth Lab, Inc. that if pharmaceutical manufacturer directly markets to consumers, the learned intermediary doctrine does not apply, it was deemed a “revolutionary,” decision. However, since the ruling, every New Jersey court which has confronted this issue has found that the DTC exception did not … Continue Reading

Insurance Coverage Considerations for Alleged Mislabeling of Herbal and Dietary Supplements

In the wake of the New York Attorney General's recent enforcement actions against four major retailers who allegedly sold herbal supplements that did not contain labeled ingredients or contained ingredients not explicitly identified on the labels, companies throughout the supply chain should consider examining their insurance policies to see whether or not they are sufficiently covered in the event of an investigation, enforcement action and/or litigation. Types of insurance policies that may provide coverage for affected companies are commercial general liability (CGL), directors and officers liability (D&O), errors and omissions liability (E&O), and product recall.… Continue Reading

3D Printing Raises Novel Questions About Potential Product Liability

Over on the Drug & Device Law blog, Reed Smith partner Jim Beck (aka "Bexis") offers his thoughts on the possible product liability implications of printing 3D medical devices. Specifically, Jim examines the question of what party (or parties) would be held liable as the manufacturer in a product liability case involving 3D printing. There are uncertainties surrounding each of the three primary parties who may be considered for liability: the hospital that owns the 3D printer used to produce medical devices; the manufacturer of the 3D printer; or the designer of the software used by the 3D printer to create the products. Jim's post discusses the current issues around naming each of those parties as the manufacturer, and concludes that - at least for the time being - 3D printing presents an unusual situation in which it is feasible that no entity qualifies as a "manufacturer" under the Restatements for strict liability. Additional legal issues like this will likely emerge as 3D printing's popularity continues to increase.… Continue Reading

A Call for Explicit Requirement of Ascertainability in Class Actions

Over on the Drug & Device Law blog, Reed Smith partner Jim Beck (aka “Bexis”) makes a case for adding an explicit ascertainability requirement to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 (Rule 23), presently under examination by the federal Advisory Committee on Civil Rules for possible amendment. Bexis points out that many courts already (properly) impose … Continue Reading
LexBlog