By Michelle Massey (Texarkana Bureau)

Dallas, TX (Schmidt & Clark) September 18, 2007 –After 27 years of working as a pressman, Charles Wilson claims he developed myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) from exposure to benzene. Wilson’s allegations will be heard by a jury on Nov. 13, just 16 months after initiating the product liability suit.

Representing Charles Wilson and his wife Laura, are attorneys Collen Clark, Michael Schmidt, and Keith Patton from the Dallas law firm of Schmidt and Clark and attorneys F. Durham III and Kirk Pittard from the Dallas law firm of Durham and Pittard.

The suit filed in July 2006 in the Marshall Court of the Eastern District of Texas, states Wilson was exposed to benzene through “blanket washes, press washes, varnish removers, plate clearness, roller washes, and other solvents and chemicals.” Defendants named in the original petition include Rycoline Products, Rogersol, Host-man Steinberg, I.C. Compound Company, Ashland, Allied Photo Offset Supply Corporation, Day International and Lastra America Corporation.

The National Cancer Institute describes myelodysplastic syndrome as “a group of diseases in which bone marrow does not make enough healthy blood cells.” The MDS foundation states “MDS is a rare disease, whose incidence is four per 100,000.”

According to court records, the plaintiff states that his illness was caused by defendants’ negligence. Wilson says the defendants knew the products were “carcinogenic, deleterious, and highly harmful” but failed to warn, provide knowledge or precautions regarding the “highly harmful substances.” He also alleges that defendants are responsible for strict liability, gross negligence and breach of warranty.

Wilson seeks punitive and exemplary damages for medical expenses, physical pain and suffering, mental anguish, physical impairment, disfigurement, loss of earnings, and loss of consortium, companionship and society.

The plaintiff has requested a jury trial. Judge Leonard Davis will preside but has referred the pre-trial proceedings to Magistrate Judge Charles Everingham.

Responding to the plaintiffs’ complaint in September 2006, Rycoline Products, Inc. denied all allegations and asserts that Wilson’s illness was caused by negligence of others. Rycoline Products develops and provides products such as printing blankets, fountain solutions, silicone and silicone replacement parts.

Continuing its defense, Rycoline said the laintiff’s injury was caused by “unintended, unexpected and/or abnormal use or misuse” of any Rycoline products. Further, Rycoline states Wilson’s employer, Frankston Packaging Company, had knowledge of the risks and hazards in Wilson’s workplace.

Although Wilson did not sue his former employer, on May 1 the defendants filed a third-party company against Frankston Packaging (FBOT), a dissolved corporation.

At a hearing on July 27, FPBOT’s attorney filed an undisclosed settlement agreement, which is pending judicial approval.

The complaints against defendants I.C. Compound, Hostman-Steinberg, Lastra America Corporation and Allied Photo Offset Supply Corporation have been dismissed with prejudice with each party paying its own costs.

As the trial date nears, defendants Ashland and Day International filed a motion for a continuance to conduct additional discovery and depose expert witnesses. Everingham denied the motion but allowed an amended scheduling order that will give the defendants more time.

The trial date remains firm for Nov. 13. Case No.: 2:06cv00286

Litigation against Advanced Medical Optics Continues to Expand as Company Moves to Re-Enter the Multipurpose Solution Business

SANTA ANA, Calif.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Four more products liability lawsuits were filed yesterday against the manufacturer of Complete® MoisturePlus™ contact lens solution in Orange County Superior Court in Santa Ana, California (Case #07CC01330, #07CC01331, #07CC01332, #07CC01333). The product was voluntarily recalled on May 25 at the request of the Food & Drug Administration in the wake of data collected and reviewed by the Centers for Disease Control linking the solution to a serious corneal infection known as Acanthamoeba keratitis. The new cases add to a growing number of injury and class action claims arising out of the recall.

The lawsuits, naming vision products manufacturer Advanced Medical Optics, Inc., and its former parent company, Allergan, were brought by Dolores O. Morse, PhD (#07CC01332), and Kelly Segerstrom (#07CC01333), both Southern California residents, as well as Jacqueline Grossman (#07CC01331) and Krista Nelson (#07CC01330), who are residents of Washington. All of the plaintiffs allege that they contracted Acanthamoeba infections while they were using Complete® MoisturePlus™ to disinfect their contact lenses. The cases were filed by Newport Beach-based Moore Labriola LLP, which also filed the first post-recall lawsuit against AMO on June 4 (#07 CC 01296). The plaintiffs are also represented by Michael Schmidt of The Schmidt Firm and Schmidt & Clark, both based in Dallas.

Acanthamoeba infections can be chronic, resistant to treatment, and often require surgical interventions such as corneal transplantation. They not infrequently lead to blindness. Morse and Grossman both underwent surgical procedures as the result of infection-related damage and have lost the use of the affected eyes. Segerstrom is hopeful she has gotten through the worst of her infection thanks to intensive treatments, but still experiences vision problems. Nelson, a 16 year-old, continues to fight her infection, which was diagnosed last November. She is believed to be the first minor to file suit against AMO since the recall.

“We expect the litigation to grow significantly over the next several months,” said attorney Michael Schmidt, who added that his firm represents numerous Acanthamoeba victims from across the Country. Schmidt noted that many of the victims are minors. “AMO specifically targeted teenage contact lens wearers, like Krista, in their marketing campaigns,” said Schmidt, who noted that young people appear to be particularly susceptible to the risks of ineffective lens disinfectants.

According to the lawsuits, studies published well before the product was recalled showed the disinfectant in Complete® MoisturePlus™ was vastly inferior to hydrogen peroxide as well as other multipurpose contact lens solutions on the market in eradicating Acanthamoeba. The plaintiffs allege that AMO was aware of the ineffectiveness of their product but concealed that information from consumers.

The new lawsuits come a week after AMO announced plans to re-enter the multipurpose lens solution business. According to recent press reports, the company says it will start distributing an “older” formulation of the recalled product as early as August. The product will reportedly feature revised labeling designed to improve safety, and will instruct users to manually rub their lenses during the cleaning process. AMO had previously represented to consumers that they could effectively disinfect lenses without a rub step, a practice considered unsafe by many optometrists and ophthalmologists.

Attorney Thomas Moore says his clients are concerned that consumers may be misled by the launch of the old AMO formulation and may incorrectly presume the solution is adequately effective against Acanthamoeba. “The label changes are all well and good, but AMO continues to ignore the root problem, which is the ineffectiveness of their disinfectant ingredient under real-world conditions,” says Moore. The solution will reportedly use the preservative polyhexamethylene biguanide, which is the same disinfectant used in the recalled product. “That ingredient in concentrations routinely used by AMO and Allergan has been shown to be ineffective against Acanthamoeba in many published studies,” says Moore, who added that if AMO wants to take a leadership position in the contact lens solution industry, “they should develop a disinfectant that works, and stop blaming consumers for infections which could be prevented with effective products.”

California Case Alleges Advanced Medical Optics Falsely Advertised Effectiveness of Product 

Santa Ana, CA June 8, 2007 — What is believed to be the first class action lawsuit brought in the United States against the manufacturer of Complete® MoisturePlus™ contact lens solution was filed today in Orange County Superior Court in Santa Ana, California (Case#07CC01297).  The product was voluntarily recalled on May 25 at the request of the Food & Drug Administration in the wake of reports of an association between the solution and serious corneal infections.

The lawsuit, naming ocular products manufacturer Advanced Medical Optics, Inc. and others as defendants, was brought by Nicole Lazar on behalf of California consumers who purchased the product but have not alleged physical injuries.   The case lawsuit seeks reimbursement of money consumers spent to purchase the product.  In addition, the action seeks reimbursement for the cost of replacing potentially contaminated contact lenses and lens cases as a result of FDA’s recommendation that these products also be discarded by anyone who has used them in conjunction with Complete® MoisturePlus™.   

The lawsuit alleges that AMO falsely marketed the solution as an effective contact lens disinfectant against infection-causing microbes.  The complaint cites CDC data showing that consumers who disinfected their lenses with Complete® MoisturePlus™ had a seven-fold increased risk of developing a sight-threatening condition known as Acanthamoeba keratitis as compared with consumers who used other lens disinfectant products.  The illness, which usually affects the corneas of contact lens wearers, is caused by a family of microorganisms most commonly found in soil and water.  The infection can be chronic, resistant to treatment, and often requires surgical interventions such as corneal transplantation.  It not infrequently leads to blindness.

Complete® MoisturePlus™ is one of a number of so-called “all-in-one” or “multipurpose” contact lens solutions developed as “more convenient” alternatives to hydrogen peroxide disinfectant systems.  According to the class action complaint, studies published well before the product was recalled showed that the disinfectant in Complete® MoisturePlus™ was vastly inferior to hydrogen peroxide as well as other solutions on the market in eradicating Acanthamoeba.   The class action alleges that AMO was aware of the ineffectiveness of their product but concealed that information from consumers who were led to believe that the solution was at least as effective as others on the market.

“Injured consumers will be able to bring their own individual cases, but there also needs to be a remedy for those who escaped infection, but were nevertheless persuaded by AMO’s marketing campaign to purchase an inferior product,” said noted Newport Beach attorney Mark P. Robinson, whose firm Robinson, Calcagnie & Robinson is acting as co-lead counsel on the case with Thomas M. Moore of Moore Labriola LLP, also based in Newport Beach.  Moore’s firm along with Schmidt & Clark in Dallas, Texas represent the plaintiff in he first personal injury case against AMO filed this past Monday on behalf of a San Diego man who developed Acanthamoeba keratitis and suffered sight loss after using the now-recalled Complete® MoisturePlus™ solution.   Robinson, Moore, and Schmidt say they are reviewing a number of potential claims and expect additional personal injury cases to be filed in the near future.

###

California Case Alleges Advanced Medical Optics Product Led to Sight-Threatening Infection

Santa Ana, CA (PRWEB) June 4, 2007 — The Dallas-based law firm Schmidt & Clark announced today that it represents a Southern California couple in what is believed to be the first personal injury lawsuit brought against the manufacturers of Complete® MoisturePlus™ contact lens solution since the product was voluntarily recalled on May 25 at the request of the Food & Drug Administration.

Read The Press Release: First Complete® MoisturePlus™ Recall Lawsuit

Complete® MoisturePlus™consumers can learn more about the Complete® MoisturePlus™ Recall and Acanthamoeba Keratitis by visiting the following links:

>> Complete® MoisturePlus™

>> Acanthamoeba Keratitis

Schmidt & Clark, LLP, a mass torts law firm has reported receiving a significant number of inquiries from Reglan users claiming to suffer from serious side effects including a movement disorder known as Tardive Dyskineisa.

Approved in 1995, Reglan (Generic: metoclopramide) is a prescription medication that is designed to treat primarily gastro intestinal disorders, particularly, when there is a motility issue with the stomach or intestines. Reglan is indicated for short-term use although, a physician may sometimes determine to prescribe Reglan for a longer period of time and for other medical conditions.

Safety experts from the Duke University School of Medicine, publishing in the November/December 2004 Journal of the American Pharmacists Association, caution that the use of Reglan is increasing and that this fact may result in more cases of drug-induced movement disorders from the medication.

The U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) has ONLY approved Reglan for short-term use (4 to 12 weeks) and ONLY when conservative treatment fails.

Long-term use of Reglan may cause a serious side effect known as Tardive Dyskinesia (TD). TD may be accompanied by very mild symptoms to a more severe form which causes a life-long and irreversible neurological movement disorders.

TD is characterized by repetitive, involuntary and purposeless movements. Signs of the disorder may include the following symptoms:

Involuntary jerking movements/spasms of the tongue, face, mouth and jaw.

• Uncontrolled facial grimacing
• Tongue protrusion
• Lip smacking
• Lip puckering/pursing
• Rapid eye blinking
• Uncontrollable movement in the arms, legs, and trunk
• Involuntary movement on the hands and fingers 

If you believe that you may have developed TD as a result of taking Reglan, it is important that you contact your physician and be evaluated.

Michael Schmidt, Managing Partner of Schmidt & Clark has noticed an alarming number of inquiries to the firm related to Reglan. Mr. Schmidt stated “We are a firm that focuses on mass torts litigation. As a result, we have received a large number of inquiries where the party has stated that they have been diagnosed with Tardive Dyskinesia after having taken Reglan. While there have been warnings regarding TD by the manufacturer, based on the number of calls to my office and the study cited by the Duke University School of Medicine and the Journal of the American Pharmacists Association, it would appear that the number of Reglan related TD cases and inquiries to my office may continue to rise.”

About Schmidt & Clark, LLP

Schmidt & Clark is a national law firm that focuses on mass torts, personal injury, product liability, environmental litigation, toxic exposure, transportation disasters, automotive crashworthiness, medical device failures and medical malpractice.

Schmidt & Clark is currently evaluating potential Reglan lawsuits in all states whereby the patient has 1) been diagnosed by a physician with TD and 2) has been on Reglan at the time of the diagnosis. For more information on Schmidt & Clark, LLP, please visit: www.schmidtandclark.com or call toll free 24 hrs/day (866) 588-0600.

Reglan patients can learn more about Reglan and Tardive Dyskinesia by visiting: http://www.schmidtandclark.com/Reglan

###

CONTACT INFORMATION

Michael Schmidt
Schmidt & Clark, L.L.P.
schmidt@schmidtandclark.com
(866) 588-0600