KANSAS CITY — A Missouri man has sued Becton, Dickinson and Company and two subsidiaries, alleging that a vascular filter implanted to help prevent blood clots eroded into his aorta and caused an injury requiring surgical repair.
The complaint was filed Oct. 6 in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri.
Jason Robinson alleges that a Bard G2 inferior vena cava filter was implanted in him on July 21, 2009.
The device was placed in the inferior vena cava, a large vein that carries blood from the lower body toward the heart.
According to the complaint, on July 5, 2023, erosion of the filter injured Robinson’s aorta, and he required surgical repair with an aortic stent graft.
The defendants are Becton, Dickinson and Company, C.R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular Inc. The complaint describes Becton Dickinson as the parent company of the two Bard entities and says the companies designed, manufactured, marketed and sold the filter.
It alleges that the device was defective and unreasonably dangerous when it entered the marketplace, and that the companies failed to adequately test and inspect it, warn patients and medical providers about risks or recall it on time.
Robinson’s allegations focus in part on the filter’s construction from Nitinol, a nickel-titanium alloy.
The complaint claims that surface marks, grinding marks, cracks and other flaws weakened the device and made it more susceptible to fatigue and fracture inside the body.
It further alleges that the G2 filter’s exterior was not electro-polished during manufacturing, a process the complaint says removes surface blemishes and can improve structural integrity.
The lawsuit says the G2 was developed as a successor to Bard’s Recovery Filter System, which the complaint alleges was removed from the market in 2005 after problems including strut fractures, migration, penetration or perforation of the vena cava, and tilting.
The filing describes the G2 as similar in design to the Recovery filter, with differences in dimensions and angles.
It noted that the G2 was marketed with claims of enhanced fracture resistance, improved centering and increased resistance to migration.
The complaint also discusses later versions of the company’s filters. It says Bard introduced the G2 Express in 2008, adding a hook at the top to allow a physician to attempt removal.
In 2010, it introduced the Eclipse filter, which the complaint describes as identical to the G2 Express except that the Eclipse’s surface was electro-polished.
Robinson’s filing alleges the Eclipse was introduced because the earlier Recovery, G2 and G2 Express filters were not electro-polished and had experienced increased rates of failure or fracture.
Robinson brings claims including negligence, strict liability for alleged design defects, failure to warn, breach of express and implied warranties, gross negligence and punitive damages.
He alleges that the filter fractured, fatigued, migrated or perforated tissue or blood vessels, causing serious physical injury, and says he has experienced pain and suffering, medical expenses and other economic losses.
The complaint also says he may need further medical treatment.
The filing alleges that the companies knew or should have known about the filter’s risks and failed to adequately disclose them to patients, physicians and the public.
It claims the defendants continued to market the device despite reports of failures and complications.
These assertions are allegations in Robinson’s complaint; the filing does not establish that a court has found the companies liable or determined the cause of his injury.
Robinson asks the court for actual, compensatory and punitive damages, as well as attorney fees, expenses, costs, interest and other relief. The amount of damages, if any, would be determined in the case. He is represented by Andrew N. Faes and Thomas A. Rottinghaus of Wagstaff & Cartmell in Kansas City.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, Western Division, case number: 4:26-cv-0866
