A Bard Infuse-A-Port Lawsuit: Maryland Woman Files Personal Injury Lawsuit Complaint In Arizona Federal Court Against Bard After Developing a Pulmonary Embolism.
On September 19, 2023 a woman residing in Maryland filed a personal injury lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, styled Joanna Randow v. C.R. Bard, Inc., Bard Access Systems, Inc. and Peripheral Vascular, Inc. et. al., Case No. 2:23-cv-01965-DGC, alleging, among other things, that the Defendants designed, manufactured, marketed and/or sold a Bard Infuse-A-Port M.R.I. Implantable Port device (“Infuse-A-Port”) that plaintiff had implanted to facilitate chemotherapy treatment but that in November 2021, after having the Infuse-A-Port system removed (because the device was no longer functioning) she developed a pulmonary embolism.
Bard Infuse-A-Port Personal Injury Lawsuit
According to the Bard Infuse-A-Port lawsuit, the Infuse-A-Port is a totally implantable vascular access device designed to provide repeated access to the vascular system (for the delivery of medication, intravenous fluids, parenteral nutrition solutions, and blood products) that consists of two primary components: an injection port and a silicone catheter.
The Bard Infuse-A-Port complaint, however, alleges that silicone catheters are more likely to fracture, rupture or break then polyurethane catheters. Indeed, according to the Bard lawsuit complaint echocardiogram examinations in March and June 2022 and June 2023 allegedly showed a fragmented portion of catheter in Plaintiff’s heart.
According to the Bard Infuse-A-Port lawsuit complaint, Defendants allegedly did not adequately warn Plaintiff or Plaintiff’s physicians of the true quantitative or qualitative risk of fracture, migration, perforation, thromboembolism or dislodgment associated with the Infuse-A-Port system.
Bard Infuse-A-Port Injuries Alleged In Complaint
The Plaintiff alleges in the Bard Infuse-A-Port personal injury complaint that she suffered from:
- Pulmonary embolism
- Severe physical pain and injuries
- Risk of future cardiac injuries
- Risk of future vasculature perforation
- Risk of future thromboembolism or pulmonary emboli
- Emotional distress
- Loss of the capacity for the enjoyment of life
- Expenses for medical care and treatment
Claims Asserted In Bard Infuse-A-Port Injury Lawsuit
The Bard Infuse-A-Port injury lawsuit complaint reportedly asserts claims for the following causes of action:
- First Cause of Action – Negligence
- Second Cause of Action – Strict Liability – Failure to Warn
- Third Cause of Action – Strict Liability – Manufacturing Defect
- Fourth Cause of Action – Strict Liability – Design Defect
- Fifth Cause of Action – Breach of Implied Warranty of Merchantability
- Sixth Cause of Action – Breach of Express Warranty
- Seventh Cause of Action – Fraudulent Concealment
Damages Sought By Plaintiff in Bard Infuse-A-Port Lawsuit
The Plaintiff in the Bard personal injury lawsuit reportedly seeks, among other things, the following relief:
- General damages
- Compensatory damages
- Special damages for past, present, and future, medical expenses
- Punitive damages
- Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest
- Attorneys’ fees
- Costs and expenses of litigation
If you were injured from a Bard port catheter, connect with a products liability injury lawyer to see if you may be eligible to recover compensation from a Bard port catheter lawsuit.
If You Have Thoughts On The Bard Infuse-A-Port Lawsuit, Share Your Comments Below.