Pfizer has recently recalled one million packs of birth control for a packaging error in the amount of active versus inactive pills. The error may leave women without adequate contraception if this is the preferred method of birth control. Blister packs of birth control normally include 21 active pills and 7 inactive pills. However, Pfizer noticed that certain packs contained fewer than 21 active pills and others that contained more than 21 active pills. Pfizer also discovered that some of the inactive pills were intermixed with the active pills, disrupting the normal cycle and raising the risk of accidental pregnancy.

The lots included in the recall are Lo/Ovral-28 tablets and Norgestrel and Ethinyl Estradiol tablets. The packaging error was a result of mechanical errors and visual oversight, and Pfizer reports that the problem was promptly fixed upon realization. Although the recall does not affect the safety of its users, it does include a warning that it raises the risk of unintended pregnancy.

The pharmaceutical litigation attorneys are Arias, Ozzello & Gignac are currently researching consequences of this packaging error. If you or someone you know has used one of the recalled lots, contact us today for a free consultation. A list of the recalled lots can be found on the FDA website.

According to a study published in Research on Aging, approximately 63% of seniors have experienced discrimination on the basis of age, and 30% have been mistreated because of their age. Respondents in the study also reported being discriminated against based on gender, race, ancestry, and to some extent, disability and appearance.

The study began in 2006, and at the time, all the people in the study were about 50 years of age. The data came from the federal Health and Retirement Study. There were about 6, 400 people included in the study. The researchers wanted to find out what seniors thought about discriminatory behavior. They were not surprised at the high proportion of seniors who said that they experienced discriminatory behavior.

However, the researchers also found that some categories of persons were more likely to report discriminatory behavior than others. For instance, black Americans, and seniors in a financially weaker position were more likely to experience discrimination. Interestingly enough, people who were divorced, widowed or separated reported higher levels of discrimination. In contrast, whites, those who were married or in a relationship, and those who had significant household assets, were less likely to face discrimination.

None of this should be news to any California discrimination lawyer, but the researchers also found that such discrimination was linked to higher rates of depression and poor mental health. When blacks and people in lower financial positions are discriminated against, it is a greater concern because these people may not have access to psychological facilities necessary to deal with depression and other mental health problems.

The researchers also found it interesting that people who felt harassed or threatened, or felt that others were afraid of them were affected differently by discrimination, compared to those who suffered more severe effects of discrimination, like the loss of a job opportunity because of age, or unwarranted questioning by police because of race.

On January 20, 2012, Kia announced a recall of 146,000 vehicles for faulty airbags that may not deploy in the event of a collision. Kia reports that in most cases the driver would be warned of the airbag defect by a warning light, and that it has not heard of any injuries related to the damaged product.

The recall includes the Optima sedan from 2006-2008 and the Rondo wagon from 2007-2008. This recall came not long after Hyundai, the parent company of Kia, recalled 205,000 vehicles for a similar problem. The defect in the airbag comes from the clock spring, a component found in the steering wheel. Over time, the clock spring assembly may wear and become damaged or defective as a result. According to Kia, this damaged clock spring may prevent the airbag from deploying in a crash.

Even though Kia has reported that no serious injuries have occurred, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has reported that this defect could pose a serious safety risk to those involved. The NHTSA and Kia’s objective is to get the cars back to the dealership for repair before any serious injuries occur. The recall is expected to begin in March.

Retailer Forever 21 is being sued by 5 employees of the company who allege that their employer made them work through lunch breaks, and made them stay back after they had clocked out to to get their bags checked for stolen property.

The 5 plaintiffs are seeking damages for the hours that they worked during their lunch break, as well as the time that they were made to stay back after they clocked out, for bag searches. According to the plaintiffs, they were routinely made to queue up after they clocked out in order to get their bags searched for stolen merchandise, and were not paid for this additional period of time.

Attorneys representing these plaintiffs say that this practice is widespread across the Forever 21 chain. Forever 21 has also confirmed that it has a policy that requires employees to submit to a bag check before clocking out. Some of the plaintiffs represented in the lawsuit say that they have worked in more than one Forever 21 outlet, and found the same practice of being asked to stay back after they had clocked out, prevalent in all these outlets. The lawsuit has been filed in the San Francisco Superior Court.

To the general public, it may seem like going through a bag search takes just a few seconds of your time. However, California employment lawyers know differently. Bag searches can take time, especially at a retailer with dozens of employees or even more. Additionally, the practice of making employees work at a retail store even during lunch hours is fairly common, even though it is undeniably cruel. It is likely that this lawsuit will be settled out of court.

The Supreme Court has ruled that church employees, who believe that they have been discriminated against, may not be protected under federal discrimination laws, because the Constitution recognizes the right of religious institutions to select their own leaders.

The case relates to Cheryl Perich, a teacher who alleges in her lawsuit that the Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School in Redford, Michigan violated federal anti discrimination laws when it terminated her after she was diagnosed with narcolepsy. She joined the school as a teacher in 1999, and underwent religious training. In 2004, she became ill, but was back at work in 2005. By this time, the school informed her that her position was no longer vacant. When she threatened legal action against the school, she was fired.

According to the church as well as school officials, her behavior amounted to a violation of the doctrine of the Lutheran Church-Missouri synod, which holds that disputes should be resolved within the parameters of the church's doctrine, and not taken to court. Perich then sued the church, alleging violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued the church on her behalf.

The EEOC based its lawsuit on ministerial exemption, a clause that California employment lawyers know applies only to persons who perform religious duties in the church. However, the US Court Of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that Perich did not qualify as a minister. The Supreme Court has disagreed, and has said that she does meet the ministerial exemption clause. According to her own estimation, the religious part of her duties took about 45 minutes per day. She taught some religion classes, and on occasion, even led chapel services.

This is one of the most important church-related decisions by the Supreme Court in decades, and is expected to include some, but not all teachers employed in church schools.

Numerous reports have been made regarding failures of the Bard PowerPort device and its separation. Several users of this device have reported that the end of the catheter has dislodged or separated from the device and has gotten lost in the blood stream. Patients have undergone surgery to remove pieces of the PowerPort that have traveled to the chest, heart, or lungs. Mishaps such as these may cause chest pain or disrupt treatment plans because the fluids or drugs are not getting to their intended place.

The Bard PowerPort is a catheter implanted in a person’s body, completely under the skin. It is used to administer fluids, nutrition, or chemotherapy drugs. It can also be used to withdraw blood. The device is implanted beneath a patient’s skin and a catheter is attached to the device and placed in one of the main arteries that deliver blood to the heart. It is essentially an alternative to an IV and is most commonly used in patients who need repeated fluids or blood samples. 

If you or someone you know has been negatively affected by the Bard PowerPort device, contact the drug and medical device litigation attorneys at Arias, Ozzello & Gignac today. You may be entitled to compensation for your injuries. 

Two women have filed a lawsuit against Quest Diagnostics and its subsidiary, AmeriPath, a Florida-based company that Quest Diagnostics acquired, alleging that the company discriminates against women, specifically women with children or families. The two women are sales representatives for the company and filed this $100 million suit last Thursday in New Jersey, the company’s headquarters.

These two women, who have been employed by Quest Diagnostics for several years, describe a wide range of discrimination practices by the predominantly male management team. They allege that men and single women without the responsibility of caring for a child advance more rapidly in rank and achieve higher salaries at a quicker pace. They describe an atmosphere similar to that of an “old boys’ club” and report that females are denied equal opportunities and experience an unfavorable and even hostile work environment.

In filing this lawsuit, the women are not only asking for $100 million in damages, but also changes in the work environment to correct both past and present discriminatory practices. They also call for a monitoring system or task force dedicated to fostering an environment of equal opportunities and preventing discriminatory acts. The lawsuit extends beyond these two women as it refers to hundreds of other women who are also victims of gender-based discrimination.

Representatives of Quest Diagnostics deny these allegations and continue to avow that this company is an equal opportunity employer and treats its employees fairly. However, the rapidly growing company who reached $7.4 billion in revenue last year faces serious allegations and the possibility of large fines.

Johnson & Johnson has come under scrutiny yet again for another one of their business failures. The business being monitored this time is Animas, a branch of Johnson & Johnson that manufactures insulin pumps. Animas is at least the seventh Johnson & Johnson business to come under scrutiny, causing J&J to incur enormous fines and lost revenue. The defects in the pumps, specifically the premature rate of failure of a main component, illustrate two main problems but what is even more disturbing is Johnson & Johnson’s lack of a timely report of these occurrences. A J&J spokesperson said that she did not alert the FDA of these events because they were caused by consumers not using the insulin pumps correctly and ignored warnings that certain parts had come loose.

Johnson & Johnson’s insulin pump, roughly the size of a cell phone, injects insulin into a person’s body through a small needle under the skin. It injects this insulin automatically throughout the day and injects additional insulin before meals depending on the amount of carbohydrates consumed. The problems with these devices lie in the premature failure rate of the keypad that determines how much insulin is released into the body. Johnson & Johnson has decided to use a more durable keypad in future products.

What may be worse than premature failure is that J&J failed to report at least three situations in which the insulin pump failed and caused severe injuries. The FDA requires manufacturers to report adverse reactions or instances of failed devices within 30 days but J&J ignored this requirement. It is known that at least three patients were hospitalized for extremely high blood sugar, coma, respiratory failure, and diabetic ketoacidosis, a life-threatening complication due to a lack of insulin. J&J continued to market and sell these insulin pumps without alerting consumers of these very serious failures. 

Recalls of J&J products cost them $900 million in 2010 alone because numerous products can no longer be sold in stores. This $900 million does not cover the costs of factory upgrades or legal expenses. In reference to the defective insulin pumps, federal regulators have warned Johnson & Johnson that it could potentially face further fines as well as injunction and seizure if it does not correct its violations promptly. 

Last week, Bloomberg, a business and finance news website, reported that Pfizer has to pay more than $45 million in damages to two women who developed breast cancer as a result of using Prempro. One woman was awarded $11.2 million for her case while the other woman was awarded $34.3 million. These are just two of the 10,000 known lawsuits against Pfizer.

Prempro is a drug used by many women across the United States to treat the symptoms of menopause, namely hot flashes and mood swings. A Prempro study in 2002 linked this drug to cancer, but before the results of this study were discovered, it was estimated that more than 6 million women had taken Prempro.

Pfizer has begun settling some of the 10,000 lawsuits pending against them. It has been reported that the company has set aside $840 million so far to settle these cases. If you or someone you know has developed breast cancer as a result of taking Prempro, contact the Prempro litigation attorneys at Arias, Ozzello & Gignac today for a free consultation. 

Last week, the New York Times reported that the FDA ordered the manufacturers of surgical mesh used in women to treat urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse to study its risks. This order comes after a recent warning in July about the adverse side effects and severe complications following implantation of the mesh device.

The FDA issued an earlier warning against this device in 2008 but said that complications were rare. Since then, however, it has been discovered through a study of these devices that nearly 15% of the 185,000 women implanted with the surgical mesh have experienced complications such as infection, erosion of the mesh, hardening of the mesh, and numerous other painful complications. This same study yielded results that determined the surgical mesh devices provided no greater benefit than other forms of treatment.

It is unclear, however, whether this order will yield any results or change the design of the device. In May, over 8 months ago, the FDA issued a similar order to the manufacturers of all-metal hip implants. Yet in these past eight months, it has been reported that manufacturers are still discussing the design, not the design defects. Many are hopeful that design studies of the mesh devices will advance much more quickly than the hip studies. Many doctors are prompting for a recall of this device, and maybe the FDA order will be the first step.