Merfeld

BACKGROUND

Essure is “a permanent female birth control implanted into the patient’s fallopian tubes through a disposable delivery system.” (In re Essure Product Cases (2023) 98 Cal.App.5th 228, 232.) In February 2015, a law firm

1 filed a public “Citizen Petition” with the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) alleging Bayer failed to advise the FDA of “ ‘several adverse reactions’ ” to Essure and “ ‘actively concealed the same.’ ” Seven months later, the FDA convened a public meeting of the Obstetrics and Gynecology Devices Panel of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee to discuss the device’s safety and effectiveness. The meeting was highly publicized, and a transcript was posted on the FDA’s website. Litigation ensued and — in October 2016 — the trial court coordinated “approximately 29,000 plaintiffs’ claims against Bayer” in Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding (JCCP) No. 4887. After demurrers and a motion for summary adjudication were resolved, one theory of liability remained: Bayer’s failure to report adverse reactions to the FDA caused plaintiffs’ doctors to be inadequately warned of Essure’s risks and, in turn, resulted in plaintiffs’ injuries. Pursuant…